From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC85C43613 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:41:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24DA8212F5 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:41:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="QEI4Ii/J" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 24DA8212F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A21156B0003; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:41:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9D0AD8E0003; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:41:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 898178E0002; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:41:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-io1-f71.google.com (mail-io1-f71.google.com [209.85.166.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AED96B0003 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:41:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io1-f71.google.com with SMTP id i133so21744625ioa.11 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:dkim-signature:mime-version:references :in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vT0IOmV5vKSiaiLLTDu0ytTER6gDYyMjplNs/Pum/5Q=; b=OEPREX0TLNWv5mmL6oNHzsrxOwvHDp0h+OP0UkEtZJCELUOnBNerPMSkg0v0ECvYr6 oa/pKUJ6HRFGNl/H4dujMtwQI7uuwDCaGAWrq8+YvLq2oIY/KPOGYzYVdvTCx3C+DEyO aw5uWHS4BIUUrp0W3Tgy6LtwiR5RRQfOnY6DRsSosxGy6JQpfqGJNyEBjLzAqQP9/kk9 spUVtMcIyTi/SXBGFVQmXUn+0Ty1lpKz94UwXYhxbox6UxbzUs9XaeFIdwizWe4FjYDa pAzOq6vmkZuHhuSgfqZ4BY8uRE776TXz60s8Xq8vy8BC+WrPQtLtixbii62kURn4IPHa WjNg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVH6AcXCsUpDYfZZAOLeZa4r+6y0wC517Y5dNdVIDb3U9tHDzBY nUJUu1U7OKvFOoxdbo1S/fUWH7tnUsXDtYwKsHkJ3K41gTqcYp/Dfvnu2vRoMjbnNcTFfpG87wr mqjFqhe0cXUXtMLomCvN92erYDMh0cNaJqwvB9XhaJte2C8l7nHOeg+QSOPb9R1SW5g== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8b52:: with SMTP id c18mr36450937iot.89.1561380083223; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a5d:8b52:: with SMTP id c18mr36450887iot.89.1561380082660; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:41:22 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1561380082; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=bHtp9zT+zOvw8OMnq/ACdF0zPMVbQcluypYQwbAvDO8b8AhFPcA59UFfgw5MvrdDFZ X9bf+Gws3FSSvlflrROVjXbqpkWYRrkrlOpSm2Cz14PtpWAGe9oUibHFlrVmELE7oz/y p7YzNUy31CSUKebnPb5FCiklUpn9DCiEz00+PcJnuYAbKGZi7Pi1ZBu62Kf3oyNaq7fU CgGAe/NyWX8pNGahrlEJO7K3xkxNupF1eNcqSPZWqFZcEumnUctrLvZ7Np2pVu8cev5b vgIyDWtkIzke16W4kFOV5JSc4t5Jt+dK76qYFO+li/SYCkGhEEFNww6EG/LKVsGgxsVj Vzqw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=vT0IOmV5vKSiaiLLTDu0ytTER6gDYyMjplNs/Pum/5Q=; b=BhN6p0OAln+iVfRhKnMo1eSHKKJRfg6MPdewuyQUyto7XyOshK0D/Udk5TmUZQ5EOO ELEd2sstlYfX6umYHw1kauY4Fy2uNdD9efAe1tvh1ttywHN1qX9e/Rh5DZG39VD0JFTV vIt+f9JcO0cWAD9LaAEphdSs/Jpe7CqNkl8vxJF2bI8nkG39y036DhY0uPDAUdJci8gM RD9DT+5zLk3p4yUI6K55PIrF4Y4ogPeOuVeyNOwNo6ThH/gFYz4nJrz7T5q4Ro2clGlx +RTg+eL85F5qi/Wg/eSCvUTMOnb1sHTbP2F4SUIenBJ0OSicH6W2BGTRnvy+FncA2jgr NTlA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b="QEI4Ii/J"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of laoar.shao@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=laoar.shao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id e18sor7554702iot.134.2019.06.24.05.41.22 for (Google Transport Security); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of laoar.shao@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.65; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b="QEI4Ii/J"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of laoar.shao@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=laoar.shao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vT0IOmV5vKSiaiLLTDu0ytTER6gDYyMjplNs/Pum/5Q=; b=QEI4Ii/JgjYvV0arHUuvELncjGCeyEpAfm8BD4kAOTo6jkhiDH2Is13/npizKczz8K pRiPI0nJ6Hf6iJXiAS8+Xx9Hxc0aC0xCHPdu8QVyshmeak5abk92g+1vnKzamiGVfJXy Snjws+eyI90PMUAMdjkT+qwIoDTtvZJiaJ3vCiYpAOpPO7SPR1muO7yKv2SsNpSjOLqS ZzDNLMg58DKL/uF7XQmmeaKaKNsLPP2DckfFS4DsskD4Te9TxVAm7/VFPUo3Cvm1F/n9 /2Zbac0CziSdLqpft3h9FXP9jD5iEV+gdkk9ia2S+E/XCg0HXr6QS/Jheoajjwe4okZE SGEQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrRTp1t2axXfEQaqztzgCLboJlJ5RdFCisW+UOCEfYvD9hFXfy3YyCkQnf74bf25MayislxGDYdVd89/a7yac= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:8dcf:: with SMTP id p198mr4665574iod.46.1561380082421; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:41:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1561112086-6169-1-git-send-email-laoar.shao@gmail.com> <1561112086-6169-3-git-send-email-laoar.shao@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yafang Shao Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:40:46 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmscan: calculate reclaimed slab caches in all reclaim paths To: Kirill Tkhai Cc: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Vladimir Davydov , Mel Gorman , Linux MM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 8:33 PM Kirill Tkhai wrote: > > On 24.06.2019 15:30, Yafang Shao wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:53 PM Kirill Tkhai wrote: > >> > >> On 21.06.2019 13:14, Yafang Shao wrote: > >>> There're six different reclaim paths by now, > >>> - kswapd reclaim path > >>> - node reclaim path > >>> - hibernate preallocate memory reclaim path > >>> - direct reclaim path > >>> - memcg reclaim path > >>> - memcg softlimit reclaim path > >>> > >>> The slab caches reclaimed in these paths are only calculated in the above > >>> three paths. > >>> > >>> There're some drawbacks if we don't calculate the reclaimed slab caches. > >>> - The sc->nr_reclaimed isn't correct if there're some slab caches > >>> relcaimed in this path. > >>> - The slab caches may be reclaimed thoroughly if there're lots of > >>> reclaimable slab caches and few page caches. > >>> Let's take an easy example for this case. > >>> If one memcg is full of slab caches and the limit of it is 512M, in > >>> other words there're approximately 512M slab caches in this memcg. > >>> Then the limit of the memcg is reached and the memcg reclaim begins, > >>> and then in this memcg reclaim path it will continuesly reclaim the > >>> slab caches until the sc->priority drops to 0. > >>> After this reclaim stops, you will find there're few slab caches left, > >>> which is less than 20M in my test case. > >>> While after this patch applied the number is greater than 300M and > >>> the sc->priority only drops to 3. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao > >>> --- > >>> mm/vmscan.c | 7 +++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > >>> index 18a66e5..d6c3fc8 100644 > >>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c > >>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > >>> @@ -3164,11 +3164,13 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order, > >>> if (throttle_direct_reclaim(sc.gfp_mask, zonelist, nodemask)) > >>> return 1; > >>> > >>> + current->reclaim_state = &sc.reclaim_state; > >>> trace_mm_vmscan_direct_reclaim_begin(order, sc.gfp_mask); > >>> > >>> nr_reclaimed = do_try_to_free_pages(zonelist, &sc); > >>> > >>> trace_mm_vmscan_direct_reclaim_end(nr_reclaimed); > >>> + current->reclaim_state = NULL; > >> > >> Shouldn't we remove reclaim_state assignment from __perform_reclaim() after this? > >> > > > > Oh yes. We should remove it. Thanks for pointing out. > > I will post a fix soon. > > With the change above, feel free to add my Reviewed-by: to all of the series. > Sure, thanks for your review. Thanks Yafang