linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: vinayak menon <vinayakm.list@gmail.com>
Cc: Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	mgorman@techsingularity.net, vbabka@suse.cz, mhocko@suse.com,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, anton.vorontsov@linaro.org,
	Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: do not pass reclaimed slab to vmpressure
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:40:28 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170130234028.GA7942@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOaiJ-m=X=8GpLCW-7wVkBmT=Gq9V9ocXtcXbmNNALffLepWeg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Vinayak,
Sorry for late response. It was Lunar New Year holidays.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 01:43:23PM +0530, vinayak menon wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the explain. However, such case can happen with THP page
> > as well as slab. In case of THP page, nr_scanned is 1 but nr_reclaimed
> > could be 512 so I think vmpressure should have a logic to prevent undeflow
> > regardless of slab shrinking.
> >
> I see. Going to send a vmpressure fix. But, wouldn't the THP case
> result in incorrect
> vmpressure reporting even if we fix the vmpressure underflow problem ?

If a THP page is reclaimed, it reports lower pressure due to bigger
reclaim ratio(ie, reclaimed/scanned) compared to normal pages but
it's not a problem, is it? Because VM reclaimed more memory than
expected so memory pressure isn't severe now.

> 
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> unsigned arithmetic results in the pressure value to be
> >> >> huge, thus resulting in a critical event being sent to
> >> >> root cgroup. Fix this by not passing the reclaimed slab
> >> >> count to vmpressure, with the assumption that vmpressure
> >> >> should show the actual pressure on LRU which is now
> >> >> diluted by adding reclaimed slab without a corresponding
> >> >> scanned value.
> >> >
> >> > I can't guess justfication of your assumption from the description.
> >> > Why do we consider only LRU pages for vmpressure? Could you elaborate
> >> > a bit?
> >> >
> >> When we encountered the false events from vmpressure, thought the problem
> >> could be that slab scanned is not included in sc->nr_scanned, like it is done
> >> for reclaimed. But later thought vmpressure works only on the scanned and
> >> reclaimed from LRU. I can explain what I understand, let me know if this is
> >> incorrect.
> >> vmpressure is an index which tells the pressure on LRU, and thus an
> >> indicator of thrashing. In shrink_node when we come out of the inner do-while
> >> loop after shrinking the lruvec, the scanned and reclaimed corresponds to the
> >> pressure felt on the LRUs which in turn indicates the pressure on VM. The
> >> moment we add the slab reclaimed pages to the reclaimed, we dilute the
> >> actual pressure felt on LRUs. When slab scanned/reclaimed is not included
> >> in the vmpressure, the values will indicate the actual pressure and if there
> >> were a lot of slab reclaimed pages it will result in lesser pressure
> >> on LRUs in the next run which will again be indicated by vmpressure. i.e. the
> >
> > I think there is no intention to exclude slab by design of vmpressure.
> > Beause slab is memory consumption so freeing of slab pages really helps
> > the memory pressure. Also, there might be slab-intensive workload rather
> > than LRU. It would be great if vmpressure works well with that case.
> > But the problem with involving slab for vmpressure is it's not fair with
> > LRU pages. LRU pages are 1:1 cost model for scan:free but slab shriking
> > depends the each slab's object population. It means it's impossible to
> > get stable cost model with current slab shrinkg model, unfortunately.
> > So I don't obejct this patch although I want to see slab shrink model's
> > change which is heavy-handed work.
> >
> Looking at the code, the slab reclaimed pages started getting passed to
> vmpressure after the commit ("mm: vmscan: invoke slab shrinkers from
> shrink_zone()").
> But as you said, this may be helpful for slab intensive workloads. But in its
> current form I think it results in incorrect vmpressure reporting because of not
> accounting the slab scanned pages. Resending the patch with a modified
> commit msg
> since the underflow issue is fixed separately. Thanks Minchan.

Make sense.

Thanks, Vinayak!

--
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:[~2017-01-30 23:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-25 11:38 [PATCH] mm: vmscan: do not pass reclaimed slab to vmpressure Vinayak Menon
2017-01-25 23:27 ` Minchan Kim
2017-01-26  5:23   ` vinayak menon
2017-01-26 14:18     ` Minchan Kim
2017-01-27  8:13       ` vinayak menon
2017-01-30 23:40         ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2017-06-06 13:00           ` zhong jiang
2017-06-07  2:53             ` Minchan Kim
2017-06-07  3:07               ` zhong jiang

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=20170130234028.GA7942@bbox \
    --to=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anton.vorontsov@linaro.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=shiraz.hashim@gmail.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    --cc=vinayakm.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=vinmenon@codeaurora.org \
    /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).