From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: page_alloc: fix non-movable reclaim storm in defrag_mode
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 14:43:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aj7IUVdXgqDG6w34@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DJJ707PKYUZS.3VQ58AKYG0XNP@nvidia.com>
On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 02:29:24PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
> On Fri Jun 26, 2026 at 2:21 PM EDT, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > As we deployed defrag_mode into Meta production, pressure spikes and
> > excessive swapping were observed on some workloads. Tracing confirmed
> > that this is unmovable/reclaimable requests spinning in the allocator
> > and direct reclaim, causing excessive amounts of swap.
> >
> > The initial plan for defrag_mode was to rely on kswapd/kcompactd to
> > produce blocks, and if those are overwhelmed under high pressure, let
> > the allocator fall back (__rmqueue_steal()) after its retry loops.
> > However, that retrying results in more reclaim on some of these
> > workloads than we'd hoped, sometimes excessively so, spurred on by the
> > !costly order conditions in should_reclaim_retry().
> >
> > The storms are dependent on the request type. Reclaim will inevitably
> > make room in existing movable blocks, since that's where the LRU pages
> > live. So if movable requests retry on reclaim, they make progress.
> >
> > When non-movable requests spin in reclaim that isn't productive. They
> > cannot use the individually freed pages, and the process is unlikely
> > to accidentally free whole blocks to meet the ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT bar.
> > They spin and overreclaim excessively, which tanks performance and
> > triggers userspace guards like swap exhaustion or pressure based OOM.
> >
> > To fix this, send non-movable requests, regardless of order, into
> > pageblock reclaim/compaction. This way, they help move things along to
> > meet the ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT bar. After this patch, the reclaim storms
> > and excess OOM rates are no longer observed in production.
> >
> > The longer-term plan is still to have all requests, including the
> > movable ones, help make blocks to spread the cost of defragmenting
> > more evenly and fairly; combined with proper watermarking to reduce
> > allocation latencies in the common case. However, doing this naively
> > unearths scaling and concurrency limitations in compaction that need
> > to be addressed first. Promoting just non-movables for now is the
> > minimally viable bug fix for the above issue.
> >
> > Fixes: f38356df6474 ("mm: page_alloc: introduce defrag_mode")
>
> Should be
> Fixes: e3aa7df331bc ("mm: page_alloc: defrag_mode").
> Since I cannot find f38356df6474 in the tree.
Oops, indeed. I managed to pull that commit from the old development
branch I still had locally.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-26 18:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-26 18:21 [PATCH 0/4] mm: fix reclaim storms in defrag_mode Johannes Weiner
2026-06-26 18:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: page_alloc: __GFP_FS lockdep annotation for direct compaction Johannes Weiner
2026-06-26 18:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: compaction: support non-movable compaction for pageblock requests Johannes Weiner
2026-06-26 18:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: page_alloc: move capture_control to the page allocator Johannes Weiner
2026-06-26 18:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: page_alloc: fix non-movable reclaim storm in defrag_mode Johannes Weiner
2026-06-26 18:29 ` Zi Yan
2026-06-26 18:43 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
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=aj7IUVdXgqDG6w34@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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