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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7D2CC5DF8C for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 03:24:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 5E9AD6B0095; Sun, 23 Aug 2026 23:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 5C06F6B009B; Sun, 23 Aug 2026 23:24:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 4D6CE6B009D; Sun, 23 Aug 2026 23:24:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28D446B0095 for ; Sun, 23 Aug 2026 23:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1324041E for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 03:24:55 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 85134721350.20.606E641 Received: from mta0.migadu.com (out-170.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.170]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E9420005 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 03:24:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=qKA7mjhX; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of ridong.chen@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.170 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ridong.chen@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; cv=none; t=1787541893; b=aPuPlFxgN9cYN3KXXH06/CzZBtr3sgMgeLmBDsS5IWUwjHwcyXbzWXAjwRlsVZoCe8DziO 07TLTno2U3F7tsbctFfoUgKqC+AGfayRuwVYj3dYh08aBrpvrLqED2yTLt/CdWCiTwkDkm GPXt2I/Aw8r1hNAEpI5Y3tefBGnmpKM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=qKA7mjhX; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of ridong.chen@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.170 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ridong.chen@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1787541893; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=2NiJ7gKGNplXhdWnRiORd0oQmfXzE5e5jmRmb3tG+Oo=; b=JY4M52Iys55ogB0DZOdIrEyxmCckeGMihHC6HlohWP9RQdaEPAKa8NvWOLwHPvhT63vLc0 H0dHFRaGnT+siOWqOkhJKiltoq1mgHK9yqW3WSds+LwDl4VBd9GviDeZDyE9vsd/L0TWWM Fd0IjZBgTZSdcOKL5rUeT0GFhkyF8/A= X-Envelope-To: linux-mm@kvack.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=GJQQjYv5cAikeWZ4aygGwi6YdDnAejQoQYl0vwFIJJY=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1787541891; v=1; x=1788146691; b=qKA7mjhX8EqNoG6I6h7I+tcfMxDLqWdEdnODkaQ/xeobZYgC3tpKQ4nL0ZTpJILXqqcvyCOT g6rhSUYBRI8eNOu28tZ+qRNefDIdRrWintA5F2bzVu8MrIMIyeLnOj4ZnILXPEy1S7ubNMUEGBO tNqeR5TZfWdtJc9bLRCCdw4Y= X-Envelope-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from [10.63.107.123] (14.29.108.92) by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id aeb7d2d31c83cd6f; Mon, 24 Aug 2026 03:24:51 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: aeb7d2d31c83cd6f X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 11:24:46 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] mm/vmscan: honour node reclaim limits per type To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , David Hildenbrand , Qi Zheng , Shakeel Butt , Lorenzo Stoakes , Kairui Song , Barry Song , Axel Rasmussen , Yuanchu Xie , Wei Xu , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ridong Chen References: <20260821081741.1340277-1-ridong.chen@linux.dev> From: Ridong Chen In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 67E9420005 X-Stat-Signature: 655h4wysdisqkddxyfa4moibadn1myit X-HE-Tag: 1787541893-595691 X-HE-Meta: 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 39VDtz1m rX2BqswbEQyj1StRQjSCYsjZu4LYp52CJqVdMM/KmVB+/HZIGimAClC3b+j4sxaYMeJu3LfndOonkCeGBShOO1yLyaEa4vez50SHuvFVgQQuejpX1D0z2mZefzIFVNQdiddK70eE8Du/u6AVyQgb5a12DoJgEVZHyjy3K3TCohUPWCYbCTvyh60JkWA4lCFXP9l/OUe0Z2jirB+yuIX3k5VYbjOcak3MUohtPnW/DfUsqIutdcIgUKgo3jjlsOOaqnVGS8OJiKJKgtkfOQQRwFmgPFA== Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 8/21/2026 7:20 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 21-08-26 19:10:45, Ridong Chen wrote: >>>> Did you mean that min_slab_pages and min_unmapped_pages should influence >>>> proactive per-node reclaim? >>> I apologize for being incoherent in my last email, it was after a full day of work. What I wanted to say is that min_slab_pages and min_unmapped_pages should *not* influence proactive per-node reclaim. >>> Nope, exactly opposite >>> >> >> I would really appreciate it if you could clarify this further. Sorry, I'm >> not sure I fully understand what you meant. > > pro-active (userspace triggered) node reclaim should completely ignore > all those historical node_reclaim tunables. Yeah, this matches my understanding. Apologies again for the confusing reply. Since Johannes has acked patch 3, perhaps we can simply remove the conditional check in __node_reclaim and keep the shrink loop as follows: ``` @@ -7906,16 +7906,16 @@ static unsigned long __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, noreclaim_flag = memalloc_noreclaim_save(); set_task_reclaim_state(p, &sc->reclaim_state); - if (node_pagecache_reclaimable(pgdat) > pgdat->min_unmapped_pages || - node_page_state_pages(pgdat, NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE_B) > pgdat->min_slab_pages) { - /* - * Free memory by calling shrink node with increasing - * priorities until we have enough memory freed. - */ - do { - shrink_node(pgdat, sc); - } while (sc->nr_reclaimed < nr_pages && --sc->priority >= 0); - } + /* + * Free memory by calling shrink node with increasing + * priorities until we have enough memory freed. + * + * What to reclaim is gated per type by sc->skip_slab_reclaim and + * sc->skip_file_reclaim. + */ + do { + shrink_node(pgdat, sc); + } while (sc->nr_reclaimed < nr_pages && --sc->priority >= 0); set_task_reclaim_state(p, NULL); memalloc_noreclaim_restore(noreclaim_flag); ``` -- Best regards Ridong