linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:48:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090715194820.237a4d77.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090715223854.7548740a@bree.surriel.com>

On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:38:53 -0400 Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:

> When way too many processes go into direct reclaim, it is possible
> for all of the pages to be taken off the LRU.  One result of this
> is that the next process in the page reclaim code thinks there are
> no reclaimable pages left and triggers an out of memory kill.
> 
> One solution to this problem is to never let so many processes into
> the page reclaim path that the entire LRU is emptied.  Limiting the
> system to only having half of each inactive list isolated for
> reclaim should be safe.
> 

Since when?  Linux page reclaim has a bilion machine years testing and
now stuff like this turns up.  Did we break it or is this a
never-before-discovered workload?

> ---
> This patch goes on top of Kosaki's "Account the number of isolated pages"
> patch series.
> 
>  mm/vmscan.c |   25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: mmotm/mm/vmscan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- mmotm.orig/mm/vmscan.c	2009-07-08 21:37:01.000000000 -0400
> +++ mmotm/mm/vmscan.c	2009-07-08 21:39:02.000000000 -0400
> @@ -1035,6 +1035,27 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> + * Are there way too many processes in the direct reclaim path already?
> + */
> +static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file)
> +{
> +	unsigned long inactive, isolated;
> +
> +	if (current_is_kswapd())
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (file) {
> +		inactive = zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
> +		isolated = zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE);
> +	} else {
> +		inactive = zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
> +		isolated = zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON);
> +	}
> +
> +	return isolated > inactive;
> +}
> +
> +/*
>   * shrink_inactive_list() is a helper for shrink_zone().  It returns the number
>   * of reclaimed pages
>   */
> @@ -1049,6 +1070,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  	struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
>  	int lumpy_reclaim = 0;
>  
> +	while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file))) {
> +		schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ/10);
> +	}

This (incorrectly-laid-out) code is a no-op if signal_pending().

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-16  2:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-16  2:38 [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  2:48 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-07-16  3:10   ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:21     ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-16  3:28       ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:38         ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-16  3:42           ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:51             ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-16  3:53           ` [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already (v3) Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  4:02             ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-16  4:09               ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  4:26                 ` Andrew Morton
2009-07-29 15:04             ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-29 16:19               ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:36   ` [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already (v2) Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:19 ` [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-16  3:32   ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-16  3:42     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-07-16  3:47       ` Rik van Riel

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=20090715194820.237a4d77.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).