From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org,yuzhao@google.com,yosryahmed@google.com,yangyifei03@kuaishou.com,songmuchun@bytedance.com,shakeelb@google.com,roman.gushchin@linux.dev,mkoutny@suse.com,mhocko@suse.com,hannes@cmpxchg.org,tjmercier@google.com,akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: + mm-memcg-use-larger-batches-for-proactive-reclaim.patch added to mm-unstable branch
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2024 23:20:37 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240204072037.B093DC433F1@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
The patch titled
Subject: mm: memcg: use larger batches for proactive reclaim
has been added to the -mm mm-unstable branch. Its filename is
mm-memcg-use-larger-batches-for-proactive-reclaim.patch
This patch will shortly appear at
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches/mm-memcg-use-larger-batches-for-proactive-reclaim.patch
This patch will later appear in the mm-unstable branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything
branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
and is updated there every 2-3 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: "T.J. Mercier" <tjmercier@google.com>
Subject: mm: memcg: use larger batches for proactive reclaim
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 23:38:54 +0000
Before 388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive
reclaim") we passed the number of pages for the reclaim request directly
to try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages, which could lead to significant
overreclaim. After 0388536ac291 the number of pages was limited to a
maximum 32 (SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX) to reduce the amount of overreclaim.
However such a small batch size caused a regression in reclaim performance
due to many more reclaim start/stop cycles inside memory_reclaim.
Reclaim tries to balance nr_to_reclaim fidelity with fairness across nodes
and cgroups over which the pages are spread. As such, the bigger the
request, the bigger the absolute overreclaim error. Historic in-kernel
users of reclaim have used fixed, small sized requests to approach an
appropriate reclaim rate over time. When we reclaim a user request of
arbitrary size, use decaying batch sizes to manage error while maintaining
reasonable throughput.
root - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec)
pre-0388536ac291 : 68047 10.46
post-0388536ac291 : 13742 inf
(reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 67352 10.51
/uid_0 - 1G reclaim pages/sec time (sec) overreclaim (MiB)
pre-0388536ac291 : 258822 1.12 107.8
post-0388536ac291 : 105174 2.49 3.5
(reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 233396 1.12 -7.4
/uid_0 - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec)
pre-0388536ac291 : 72334 7.09
post-0388536ac291 : 38105 14.45
(reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 72914 6.96
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240202233855.1236422-1-tjmercier@google.com
Fixes: 0388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive re=
claim")
Signed-off-by: T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: Efly Young <yangyifei03@kuaishou.com>
Cc: Michal Koutny <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c~mm-memcg-use-larger-batches-for-proactive-reclaim
+++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -6994,9 +6994,11 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct ker
if (!nr_retries)
lru_add_drain_all();
+ /* Will converge on zero, but reclaim enforces a minimum */
+ unsigned long batch_size = (nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed) / 4;
+
reclaimed = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(memcg,
- min(nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX),
- GFP_KERNEL, reclaim_options);
+ batch_size, GFP_KERNEL, reclaim_options);
if (!reclaimed && !nr_retries--)
return -EAGAIN;
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from tjmercier@google.com are
mm-memcg-dont-periodically-flush-stats-when-memcg-is-disabled.patch
mm-memcg-use-larger-batches-for-proactive-reclaim.patch
reply other threads:[~2024-02-04 7:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240204072037.B093DC433F1@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=tjmercier@google.com \
--cc=yangyifei03@kuaishou.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.