From: Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>, Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org (open list:CONTROL GROUP - MEMORY
RESOURCE CONTROLLER (MEMCG)),
linux-mm@kvack.org (open list:CONTROL GROUP - MEMORY RESOURCE
CONTROLLER (MEMCG)),
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/mglru: fix ineffective memory protection for non-kswapd reclaim
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2026 19:09:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260828110919.1324028-3-ridong.chen@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260828110919.1324028-1-ridong.chen@linux.dev>
From: Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>
memory.min/low is silently bypassed for MGLRU during global proactive
reclaim (writing to the root memory.reclaim) and global direct reclaim.
It can be reproduced as follows:
# echo 7 > /sys/kernel/mm/lru_gen/enabled
# cd /sys/fs/cgroup
# mkdir -p a/b
# echo 100M > a/memory.min
# echo +memory > a/cgroup.subtree_control
# echo 100M > a/b/memory.min
# echo $$ > a/b/cgroup.procs
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/testfile bs=1M count=200
# cat a/b/memory.current
222650368
# echo 500M > memory.reclaim
-bash: echo: write error: Resource temporarily unavailable
# cat a/b/memory.current
6070272
memory.min is 100M, yet reclaim drops a/b down to 6M, breaking the
protection. The traditional LRU path is not affected because
shrink_node() calls mem_cgroup_calculate_protection() for each memcg it
visits during a top-down tree walk.
Commit 30d77b7eef01 ("mm/mglru: fix ineffective protection calculation")
moved the protection computation into lru_gen_age_node(), which only
runs for kswapd. Non-kswapd global reclaim reaches shrink_one() through
lru_gen_shrink_node() -> shrink_many() without any protection
computation, so emin/elow remain stale or zero.
Introduce mem_cgroup_protection_path() which computes emin/elow along
the root-to-target path only by iterating through the cgroup ancestors
array top-down. This avoids the full tree traversal that would be
needed with mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(), limiting the cost to
O(depth) per memcg - typically 3-5 levels.
Call it from shrink_one() for the non-kswapd path so that each memcg
about to be shrunk has correct protection values.
Fixes: e4dde56cd208 ("mm: multi-gen LRU: per-node lru_gen_folio lists")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
Signed-off-by: Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 11 ++++++++++
mm/memcontrol.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
mm/vmscan.c | 8 ++++++-
3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index 7d1c0ce189a8..8066b798a759 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -605,6 +605,10 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
+void mem_cgroup_protection_path(struct mem_cgroup *root,
+ struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
+#endif
static inline bool mem_cgroup_unprotected(struct mem_cgroup *target,
struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
@@ -1133,6 +1137,13 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
{
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
+static inline void mem_cgroup_protection_path(struct mem_cgroup *root,
+ struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
+{
+}
+#endif
+
static inline bool mem_cgroup_unprotected(struct mem_cgroup *target,
struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
{
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 1271d390b617..095050d4296a 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -5198,6 +5198,51 @@ void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
page_counter_calculate_protection(&root->memory, &memcg->memory, recursive_protection);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
+/**
+ * mem_cgroup_protection_path - compute protection along root->memcg path
+ * @root: the top ancestor of the sub-tree being checked (NULL for root_mem_cgroup)
+ * @memcg: the target memory cgroup
+ *
+ * Walk the ancestor path from @root down to @memcg and compute the effective
+ * protection at each level. This is safe for isolated queries because it
+ * ensures parents are computed before children.
+ */
+void mem_cgroup_protection_path(struct mem_cgroup *root,
+ struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
+{
+ bool recursive_protection =
+ cgrp_dfl_root.flags & CGRP_ROOT_MEMORY_RECURSIVE_PROT;
+ struct cgroup *cg;
+ int root_level, i;
+
+ if (mem_cgroup_disabled())
+ return;
+
+ if (!root)
+ root = root_mem_cgroup;
+
+ if (memcg == root)
+ return;
+
+ root_level = root->css.cgroup->level;
+ cg = memcg->css.cgroup;
+
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ for (i = root_level + 1; i <= cg->level; i++) {
+ struct mem_cgroup *cur;
+
+ cur = mem_cgroup_from_css(cgroup_css(cg->ancestors[i],
+ &memory_cgrp_subsys));
+ if (cur)
+ page_counter_calculate_protection(&root->memory,
+ &cur->memory,
+ recursive_protection);
+ }
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_LRU_GEN */
+
static int charge_memcg(struct folio *folio, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
gfp_t gfp)
{
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index f11491ee9ed5..e0ba68ede745 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -5102,7 +5102,13 @@ static int shrink_one(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
- /* lru_gen_age_node() called mem_cgroup_calculate_protection() */
+ /*
+ * For kswapd, lru_gen_age_node() has already called
+ * mem_cgroup_calculate_protection()
+ */
+ if (!current_is_kswapd())
+ mem_cgroup_protection_path(NULL, memcg);
+
if (mem_cgroup_below_min(NULL, memcg))
return MEMCG_LRU_YOUNG;
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-28 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-28 11:09 [PATCH v2 0/2] mm/mglru: fix ineffective memory protection for non-kswapd reclaim Ridong Chen
2026-08-28 11:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/page_counter: avoid integer overflow in effective_protection() Ridong Chen
2026-08-30 7:59 ` Barry Song
2026-08-28 11:09 ` Ridong Chen [this message]
2026-08-30 7:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/mglru: fix ineffective memory protection for non-kswapd reclaim Barry Song
2026-08-30 10:13 ` Ridong Chen
2026-08-30 10:40 ` Barry Song
2026-08-30 10:56 ` Ridong Chen
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=20260828110919.1324028-3-ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--to=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@xiaomi.com \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@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.