From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] vmscan: shrink_slab() require number of lru_pages, not page order
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:15:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100715121551.bd5ccc61.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100713144008.EA52.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:41:28 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Now, shrink_slab() has following scanning equation.
>
> lru_scanned max_pass
> basic_scan_objects = 4 x ------------- x -----------------------------
> lru_pages shrinker->seeks (default:2)
>
> scan_objects = min(basic_scan_objects, max_pass * 2)
>
> Then, If we pass very small value as lru_pages instead real number of
> lru pages, shrink_slab() drop much objects rather than necessary. and
> now, __zone_reclaim() pass 'order' as lru_pages by mistake. that makes
> bad result.
>
> Example, If we receive very low memory pressure (scan = 32, order = 0),
> shrink_slab() via zone_reclaim() always drop _all_ icache/dcache
> objects. (see above equation, very small lru_pages make very big
> scan_objects result)
>
> This patch fixes it.
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 6ff51c0..1bf9f72 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2612,6 +2612,8 @@ static int __zone_reclaim(struct zone *zone, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
>
> nr_slab_pages0 = zone_page_state(zone, NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE);
> if (nr_slab_pages0 > zone->min_slab_pages) {
> + unsigned long lru_pages = zone_reclaimable_pages(zone);
> +
> /*
> * shrink_slab() does not currently allow us to determine how
> * many pages were freed in this zone. So we take the current
> @@ -2622,7 +2624,7 @@ static int __zone_reclaim(struct zone *zone, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
> * Note that shrink_slab will free memory on all zones and may
> * take a long time.
> */
> - while (shrink_slab(sc.nr_scanned, gfp_mask, order) &&
> + while (shrink_slab(sc.nr_scanned, gfp_mask, lru_pages) &&
> (zone_page_state(zone, NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE) + nr_pages >
> nr_slab_pages0))
> ;
Wouldn't it be better to recalculate zone_reclaimable_pages() each time
around the loop? For example, shrink_icache_memory()->prune_icache()
will remove pagecache from an inode if it hits the tail of the list.
This can change the number of reclaimable pages by squigabytes, but
this code thinks nothing changed?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-15 19:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-08 7:38 [PATCH v2 1/2] vmscan: don't subtraction of unsined KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-08 7:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] vmscan: shrink_slab() require number of lru_pages, not page order KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-08 13:23 ` Rik van Riel
2010-07-08 14:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-08 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-08 21:01 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-09 0:46 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-09 8:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-09 10:13 ` [PATCH] vmscan: stop meaningless loop iteration when no reclaimable slab KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-09 10:53 ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-09 11:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-11 22:28 ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-13 4:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-13 6:33 ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-09 14:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-13 4:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-09 8:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] vmscan: shrink_slab() require number of lru_pages, not page order Minchan Kim
2010-07-09 13:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-13 5:41 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-15 19:15 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-07-16 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-16 1:44 ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-08 7:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] vmscan: don't subtraction of unsined KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-08 14:01 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-08 20:00 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-09 1:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-09 1:46 ` Minchan Kim
2010-07-09 22:28 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-13 9:32 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-07-14 1:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-07-14 2:15 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
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=20100715121551.bd5ccc61.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.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