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>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>, Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>, Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
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: [RFC PATCH] mm/mglru: fix ineffective memory protection for non-kswapd reclaim
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 21:30:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260826133054.88529-1-ridong.chen@linux.dev> (raw)
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
Signed-off-by: Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++++++
mm/memcontrol.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
mm/vmscan.c | 8 +++++++-
3 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index 7d1c0ce189a8..26be8277d64b 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -605,6 +605,8 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
+void mem_cgroup_protection_path(struct mem_cgroup *root,
+ struct mem_cgroup *memcg);
static inline bool mem_cgroup_unprotected(struct mem_cgroup *target,
struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
@@ -1133,6 +1135,11 @@ static inline void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
{
}
+static inline void mem_cgroup_protection_path(struct mem_cgroup *root,
+ struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
+{
+}
+
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..c739db33b917 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -5198,6 +5198,48 @@ void mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(struct mem_cgroup *root,
page_counter_calculate_protection(&root->memory, &memcg->memory, recursive_protection);
}
+/**
+ * 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();
+}
+
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 6dff207ad8c6..e572d2742c8c 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 reply other threads:[~2026-08-26 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-26 13:30 Ridong Chen [this message]
2026-08-27 1:37 ` [RFC PATCH] mm/mglru: fix ineffective memory protection for non-kswapd reclaim Ridong Chen
[not found] ` <20260826134733.051941F000E9@smtp.kernel.org>
[not found] ` <0c606cf9-2b5a-4549-8ab1-0be619487412@linux.dev>
2026-08-27 9:26 ` Michal Koutný
2026-08-28 1:49 ` Ridong Chen
2026-08-27 17:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-08-28 1:51 ` 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=20260826133054.88529-1-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=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=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 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).