[PATCH 07/24] mm: back off direct reclaim on excessive shrinker deferral

Dave Chinner
2019-08-01T02:18:32Z

From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>

When the majority of possible shrinker reclaim work is deferred by
the shrinkers (e.g. due to GFP_NOFS context), and there is more work
defered than LRU pages were scanned, back off reclaim if there are
large amounts of IO in progress.

This tends to occur when there are inode cache heavy workloads that
have little page cache or application memory pressure on filesytems
like XFS. Inode cache heavy workloads involve lots of IO, so if we
are getting device congestion it is indicative of memory reclaim
running up against an IO throughput limitation. in this situation
we need to throttle direct reclaim as we nee dto wait for kswapd to
get some of the deferred work done.

However, if there is no device congestion, then the system is
keeping up with both the workload and memory reclaim and so there's
no need to throttle.

Hence we should only back off scanning for a bit if we see this
condition and there is block device congestion present.

Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
---
include/linux/swap.h | 2 ++
mm/vmscan.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/swap.h b/include/linux/swap.h
index 978e6cd5c05a..1a3502a9bc1f 100644
--- a/include/linux/swap.h
+++ b/include/linux/swap.h
@@ -131,6 +131,8 @@ union swap_header {
*/
struct reclaim_state {
unsigned long reclaimed_pages; /* pages freed by shrinkers */
+ unsigned long scanned_objects; /* quantity of work done */
+ unsigned long deferred_objects; /* work that wasn't done */
};

#ifdef __KERNEL__
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 231ddcfcd046..4dc8e333f2c6 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -569,8 +569,11 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
* If the shrinker can't run (e.g. due to gfp_mask constraints), then
* defer the work to a context that can scan the cache.
*/
- if (shrinkctl->will_defer)
+ if (shrinkctl->will_defer) {
+ if (current->reclaim_state)
+ current->reclaim_state->deferred_objects += scan_count;
goto done;
+ }

/*
* Normally, we should not scan less than batch_size objects in one
@@ -605,6 +608,8 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,

cond_resched();
}
+ if (current->reclaim_state)
+ current->reclaim_state->scanned_objects += scanned_objects;

done:
/*
@@ -2766,7 +2771,30 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)

if (reclaim_state) {
sc->nr_reclaimed += reclaim_state->reclaimed_pages;
+
+ /*
+ * If we are deferring more work than we are actually
+ * doing in the shrinkers, and we are scanning more
+ * objects than we are pages, the we have a large amount
+ * of slab caches we are deferring work to kswapd for.
+ * We better back off here for a while, otherwise
+ * we risk priority windup, swap storms and OOM kills
+ * once we empty the page lists but still can't make
+ * progress on the shrinker memory.
+ *
+ * kswapd won't ever defer work as it's run under a
+ * GFP_KERNEL context and can always do work.
+ */
+ if ((reclaim_state->deferred_objects >
+ sc->nr_scanned - nr_scanned) &&
+ (reclaim_state->deferred_objects >
+ reclaim_state->scanned_objects)) {
+ wait_iff_congested(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
+ }
+
reclaim_state->reclaimed_pages = 0;
+ reclaim_state->deferred_objects = 0;
+ reclaim_state->scanned_objects = 0;
}

/* Record the subtree's reclaim efficiency */
--
2.22.0