linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: lwoodman@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vmscan: limit concurrent reclaimers in shrink_zone
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:14:39 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <28c262360912131614h62d8e0f7qf6ea9ab882f446d4@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091211164651.036f5340@annuminas.surriel.com>

Hi, Rik.

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
> Under very heavy multi-process workloads, like AIM7, the VM can
> get into trouble in a variety of ways.  The trouble start when
> there are hundreds, or even thousands of processes active in the
> page reclaim code.
>
> Not only can the system suffer enormous slowdowns because of
> lock contention (and conditional reschedules) between thousands
> of processes in the page reclaim code, but each process will try
> to free up to SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages, even when the system already
> has lots of memory free.
>
> It should be possible to avoid both of those issues at once, by
> simply limiting how many processes are active in the page reclaim
> code simultaneously.
>
> If too many processes are active doing page reclaim in one zone,
> simply go to sleep in shrink_zone().
>
> On wakeup, check whether enough memory has been freed already
> before jumping into the page reclaim code ourselves.  We want
> to use the same threshold here that is used in the page allocator
> for deciding whether or not to call the page reclaim code in the
> first place, otherwise some unlucky processes could end up freeing
> memory for the rest of the system.

I am worried about one.

Now, we can put too many processes reclaim_wait with NR_UNINTERRUBTIBLE state.
If OOM happens, OOM will kill many innocent processes since
uninterruptible task
can't handle kill signal until the processes free from reclaim_wait list.

I think reclaim_wait list staying time might be long if VM pressure is heavy.
Is this a exaggeration?

If it is serious problem, how about this?

We add new PF_RECLAIM_BLOCK flag and don't pick the process
in select_bad_process.

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

--
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:[~2009-12-14  0:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-11 21:46 [PATCH v2] vmscan: limit concurrent reclaimers in shrink_zone Rik van Riel
2009-12-14  0:14 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2009-12-14  4:09   ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14  4:19     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14  4:29       ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14  5:00         ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:22 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:23   ` [cleanup][PATCH 1/8] vmscan: Make shrink_zone_begin/end helper function KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:34     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:39     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:24   ` [PATCH 2/8] Mark sleep_on as deprecated KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 13:03     ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-12-14 16:04       ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-12-14 14:34     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:44     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:29   ` [PATCH 3/8] Don't use sleep_on() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:35     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 22:46     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:30   ` [PATCH 4/8] Use prepare_to_wait_exclusive() instead prepare_to_wait() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:33     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-15  0:45       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15  5:32         ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15  8:28           ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 14:36             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 14:58           ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-15 18:17             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 18:43             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-15 19:33               ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-16  0:48             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-16  2:44               ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-16  5:43               ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-14 23:03     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:30   ` [PATCH 5/8] Use io_schedule() instead schedule() KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:37     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:46     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15  0:56       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15  1:13         ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:31   ` [PATCH 6/8] Stop reclaim quickly when the task reclaimed enough lots pages KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:45     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:51       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15  0:11     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15  0:35       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:32   ` [PATCH 7/8] Use TASK_KILLABLE instead TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:47     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:52     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-14 12:32   ` [PATCH 8/8] mm: Give up allocation if the task have fatal signal KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 14:48     ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-14 23:54     ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15  0:50       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-15  1:03         ` Minchan Kim
2009-12-15  1:16           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 12:40   ` [PATCH v2] vmscan: limit concurrent reclaimers in shrink_zone KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-14 17:08 ` Larry Woodman
2009-12-15  0:49   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
     [not found]   ` <20091217193818.9FA9.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
2009-12-17 12:23     ` FWD: " Larry Woodman
2009-12-17 14:43       ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-17 19:55       ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-17 21:05         ` Hugh Dickins
2009-12-17 22:52           ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 16:23           ` Andrea Arcangeli
2009-12-18 17:43             ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 10:27       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-12-18 14:09         ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 13:38 ` Avi Kivity
2009-12-18 14:12   ` Rik van Riel
2009-12-18 14:13     ` Avi Kivity

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=28c262360912131614h62d8e0f7qf6ea9ab882f446d4@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lwoodman@redhat.com \
    --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).