Re: [PATCH v8 11/16] mm/mglru: Run aging when one type has no populatable folios

["Barry Song (Xiaomi)" <baohua@kernel.org>]

On Sat, Nov 14, 2026 at 10:02 AM <sashiko-bot@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
> issues to consider:
> - [High] mm/mglru: premature loop exit after aging in
>   try_to_shrink_lruvec()
> - [Medium] mm/mglru: late max_seq read in try_to_shrink_lruvec() causes
>   redundant aging
> --

We can add a bounded retry for this case, along with a concurrency
check to avoid concurrent aging mentioned above. Then I made the
patch as below:


Subject: [PATCH 11/16] mm/mglru: Run aging when one type has no populatable
 folios

We may have scan budget remaining for anon or file but no
folios in populatable generations to scan. In this case,
`scan_folios()` may waste time scanning that type while
the other type still has populatable folios.

Run aging in this case to make more folios populatable.
This also helps respect the scan budget distribution
determined by swappiness.

Move aging after eviction to detect a lack of scan progress
and avoid unnecessary aging when reclaim can already make progress.

To avoid excessive aging, allow no-populatable aging only once per
`try_to_shrink_lruvec()` invocation.

With extreme swappiness values such as 1 and 200, reclaim initially
focuses exclusively on the preferred type. Defer aging the lagging
type until sc->priority reaches DEF_PRIORITY / 2, where imbalanced
aging is allowed. This avoids unnecessary aging at extreme
swappiness values and has shown better performance in testing.

If evict_folio_lists() returns 0, retry once if aging has
successfully advanced the generation.

Signed-off-by: Barry Song (Xiaomi) <baohua@kernel.org>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index cb806ce0a8e6..d68fc456ca7b 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -5198,9 +5198,15 @@ static long evict_folio_lists(unsigned long nr_to_scan[], struct lruvec *lruvec,
 static bool try_to_shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
 {
 	unsigned long nr[ANON_AND_FILE];
-	bool need_rotate = false, should_age = false;
+	bool need_rotate = false, should_age = false, retried = false;
 	int swappiness = get_swappiness(lruvec, sc);
 	struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
+	/*
+	 * Avoid aging the lagging, unpreferred type at extreme swappiness;
+	 * rely on imbalanced aging once priority reaches DEF_PRIORITY / 2
+	 */
+	bool allow_no_populatable_age = (sc->priority < DEF_PRIORITY) &&
+		(swappiness > MIN_SWAPPINESS + 1 && swappiness < MAX_SWAPPINESS);
 
 	/*
 	 * Proactive reclaim initiated by userspace for anonymous memory only.
@@ -5218,22 +5224,19 @@ static bool try_to_shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
 	lru_gen_prepare_scan(lruvec, sc, memcg, swappiness, nr);
 
 	while (nr[LRU_GEN_ANON] > 0 || nr[LRU_GEN_FILE] > 0) {
+		unsigned long orig_file, orig_anon, new_seq;
 		DEFINE_MAX_SEQ(lruvec);
+		bool no_populatable;
+		long scanned;
 
 		if (mem_cgroup_below_min(sc->target_mem_cgroup, memcg)) {
 			need_rotate = true;
 			break;
 		}
 
-		if (should_run_aging(lruvec, max_seq, sc, swappiness)) {
-			trace_mm_mglru_aging(lruvec, sc, swappiness);
-			if (try_to_inc_max_seq(lruvec, max_seq, swappiness, false))
-				need_rotate = true;
-			should_age = true;
-		}
-
-		if (!evict_folio_lists(nr, lruvec, sc, swappiness, MIN_LRU_BATCH))
-			break;
+		orig_anon = nr[LRU_GEN_ANON];
+		orig_file = nr[LRU_GEN_FILE];
+		scanned = evict_folio_lists(nr, lruvec, sc, swappiness, MIN_LRU_BATCH);
 
 		if (should_abort_scan(lruvec, sc))
 			break;
@@ -5245,6 +5248,26 @@ static bool try_to_shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
 		if (root_reclaim(sc) && should_age)
 			break;
 
+		/* Limit no_populatable aging to once per try_to_shrink_lruvec() */
+		new_seq = READ_ONCE(lruvec->lrugen.max_seq);
+		no_populatable = allow_no_populatable_age && max_seq == new_seq &&
+			((nr[LRU_GEN_ANON] && nr[LRU_GEN_ANON] == orig_anon) ||
+			(nr[LRU_GEN_FILE] && nr[LRU_GEN_FILE] == orig_file));
+		allow_no_populatable_age &= !no_populatable;
+		if (no_populatable || should_run_aging(lruvec, new_seq, sc, swappiness)) {
+			trace_mm_mglru_aging(lruvec, sc, swappiness);
+			if (try_to_inc_max_seq(lruvec, new_seq, swappiness, false))
+				need_rotate = true;
+			should_age = true;
+		}
+
+		if (!scanned) {
+			/* Retry once if aging advanced max_seq */
+			if (retried || new_seq == READ_ONCE(lruvec->lrugen.max_seq))
+				break;
+			retried = true;
+		}
+
 		cond_resched();
 	}
 
-- 
2.34.1


> In addition, calling evict_folio_lists() and should_abort_scan() before
> should_run_aging() causes scan_folios() at sc->priority <=
> DEF_PRIORITY / 2 to evict directly from max_seq before
> lru_gen_imbalanced() can age page tables to separate hot folios from cold
> ones, and skips aging altogether when the first batch satisfies
> should_abort_scan().

I think this is fine. We only reclaim a small batch of folios
(MIN_LRU_BATCH) before checking should_run_aging(). If reclaim
satisfies the request, we can avoid an unnecessary aging pass.

>
> --
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261113185541.70203-1-baohua@kernel.org?part=11