Re: [PATCH] mm/mglru: preserve inactive placement when enabling MGLRU

[Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev>]

On 8/20/2026 3:50 PM, Barry Song wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 3:27 PM Ridong Chen <ridong.chen@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> From: Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>
>>
>> When the LRU is switched to MGLRU (echo y > /sys/kernel/mm/lru_gen/
>> enabled), fill_evictable() re-inserts every folio via
>> lru_gen_add_folio(..., false).  With reclaiming hardcoded to false, an
>> inactive anonymous folio (no PG_active, not in the swapcache) takes the
>> "gen = MIN_NR_GENS" branch in lru_gen_folio_seq() and is seeded at
>> seq = max_seq - 1, which lru_gen_is_active() treats as active.  Its
>> inactive placement is lost and NR_INACTIVE_ANON is folded into
>> NR_ACTIVE_ANON.
>>
>> Pass reclaiming=!active so a folio from an inactive list is seeded into
>> an older generation.  Folios from the active list carry PG_active and
>> hit the first branch either way, so they are unchanged.
>>
>> reclaiming also selects the insertion end in lru_gen_add_folio():
>> list_add_tail() for inactive folios, list_add() for active ones.  Both
>> the legacy LRU and a MGLRU generation keep the hottest folios at the
>> head and the coldest at the tail, and reclaim takes from the tail.  To
>> preserve that order the folio must be taken from the end matching the
>> insertion end, so take inactive folios from the head and active folios
>> from the tail; otherwise hot/cold would be reversed within the
>> generation.
>>
>> Tested on x86_64, next-20260812, 2G VM + 1G swap, ~1.5G anon pushed onto
>> the inactive list before enabling MGLRU:
>>
>>                           Active(anon)  Inactive(anon)
>>    before switch (legacy)        2952         1548792   kB
>>    after `echo y`, unpatched  1552052               0   kB
>>    after `echo y`, patched      15144         1536636   kB
>>
>> Inactive file folios stay inactive either way (NR_INACTIVE_FILE is
>> preserved).
>>
>> Fixes: 354ed5974429 ("mm: multi-gen LRU: kill switch")
>> Suggested-by: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
>> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
>> Signed-off-by: Ridong Chen <chenridong@xiaomi.com>
>> ---
>>   mm/vmscan.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>> index 94fc4f25e99f..7be4cec9a838 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -5311,7 +5311,23 @@ static bool fill_evictable(struct lruvec *lruvec)
>>
>>                  while (!list_empty(head)) {
>>                          bool success;
>> -                       struct folio *folio = lru_to_folio(head);
>> +                       struct folio *folio;
>> +
>> +                       /*
>> +                        * Both the legacy LRU and a MGLRU generation keep the
>> +                        * hottest folios at the head and the coldest at the
>> +                        * tail, and reclaim takes from the tail.  To preserve
>> +                        * that order, the end we take from must match the end
>> +                        * lru_gen_add_folio() inserts at: inactive folios use
>> +                        * reclaiming=true (list_add_tail), so take from the
>> +                        * head; active folios use reclaiming=false (list_add),
>> +                        * so take from the tail.  Taking from the wrong end
>> +                        * would reverse hot/cold within the generation.
>> +                        */
> 
> too many words, maybe just:
> 
> lru_gen_add_folio() uses list_add_tail() rather than list_add()
> when reclaiming is true. Match its ordering to avoid cold/hot
> Inversion.
> 
>> +                       if (active)
>> +                               folio = lru_to_folio(head);
>> +                       else
>> +                               folio = list_first_entry(head, struct folio, lru);
>>
>>                          VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(folio_test_unevictable(folio), folio);
>>                          VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(folio_test_active(folio) != active, folio);
>> @@ -5319,7 +5335,16 @@ static bool fill_evictable(struct lruvec *lruvec)
>>                          VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(folio_lru_gen(folio) != -1, folio);
>>
>>                          lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, folio);
>> -                       success = lru_gen_add_folio(lruvec, folio, false);
>> +                       /*
>> +                        * With reclaiming=false, lru_gen_folio_seq() would seed
>> +                        * an inactive folio near max_seq, which
>> +                        * lru_gen_is_active() reports as active, so its inactive
>> +                        * placement would be lost.  Pass reclaiming=!active to
>> +                        * seed it into the oldest generation instead.  This
>> +                        * reuses reclaiming beyond its folio_rotate_reclaimable()
>> +                        * meaning; it also picks list_add_tail() above.
>> +                        */
> 
> Maybe that's too verbose. How about:
> 
> "Borrow reclaiming=true to place inactive folios in the older gens"
> 
>> +                       success = lru_gen_add_folio(lruvec, folio, !active);
>>                          VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!success);
>>
>>                          if (!--remaining)
> 
> This is admittedly a bit ugly, but it seems to be the simplest
> approach. Since switching MGLRU on and off is not a common scenario,
> we probably don't want to over-engineer it. So, with the above change:
> 
> Acked-by: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>

Thanks.

Will update.

-- 
Best regards
Ridong