Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmscan: Only read new_classzone_idx from pgdat when reclaiming successfully

Minchan Kim
2011-07-21T16:36:59Z

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 05:07:06PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:30:07AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:48:47AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 01:09:03AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > Hi Mel,
> > > >
> > > > Too late review.
> > >
> > > Never too late.
> > >
> > > > At that time, I had no time to look into this patch.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 03:44:57PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > > During allocator-intensive workloads, kswapd will be woken frequently
> > > > > causing free memory to oscillate between the high and min watermark.
> > > > > This is expected behaviour. Unfortunately, if the highest zone is
> > > > > small, a problem occurs.
> > > > >
> > > > > When balance_pgdat() returns, it may be at a lower classzone_idx than
> > > > > it started because the highest zone was unreclaimable. Before checking
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > > > if it should go to sleep though, it checks pgdat->classzone_idx which
> > > > > when there is no other activity will be MAX_NR_ZONES-1. It interprets
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > > > this as it has been woken up while reclaiming, skips scheduling and
> > > >
> > > > Hmm. I can't understand this part.
> > > > If balance_pgdat returns lower classzone and there is no other activity,
> > > > new_classzone_idx is always MAX_NR_ZONES - 1 so that classzone_idx would be less than
> > > > new_classzone_idx. It means it doesn't skip scheduling.
> > > >
> > > > Do I miss something?
> > > >
> > >
> > > It was a few weeks ago so I don't rememember if this is the exact
> > > sequence I had in mind at the time of writing but an example sequence
> > > of events is for a node whose highest populated zone is ZONE_NORMAL,
> > > very small, and gets set all_unreclaimable by balance_pgdat() looks
> > > is below. The key is the "very small" part because pages are getting
> > > freed in the zone but the small size means that unreclaimable gets
> > > set easily.
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * kswapd is woken up for ZONE_NORMAL (as this is the preferred zone
> > > * as ZONE_HIGHMEM is not populated.
> > > */
> > >
> > > order = pgdat->kswapd_max_order;
> > > classzone_idx = pgdat->classzone_idx; /* classzone_idx == ZONE_NORMAL */
> > > pgdat->kswapd_max_order = 0;
> > > pgdat->classzone_idx = MAX_NR_ZONES - 1;
> > > order = balance_pgdat(pgdat, order, &classzone_idx); /* classzone_idx == ZONE_NORMAL even though
> > > * the highest zone was set unreclaimable
> > > * and it exited scanning ZONE_DMA32
> > > * because we did not communicate that
> > > * information back
> >
> > Yes. It's too bad.
> >
> > > */
> > > new_order = pgdat->kswapd_max_order; /* new_order = 0 */
> > > new_classzone_idx = pgdat->classzone_idx; /* new_classzone_idx == ZONE_HIGHMEM
> > > * because that is what classzone_idx
> > > * gets reset to
> >
> > Yes. new_classzone_idx is ZONE_HIGHMEM.
> >
> > > */
> > > if (order < new_order || classzone_idx > new_classzone_idx) {
> > > /* does not sleep, this branch not taken */
> > > } else {
> > > /* tries to sleep, goes here */
> > > try_to_sleep(ZONE_NORMAL)
> > > sleeping_prematurely(ZONE_NORMAL) /* finds zone unbalanced so skips scheduling */
> > > order = pgdat->kswapd_max_order;
> > > classzone_idx = pgdat->classzone_idx; /* classzone_idx == ZONE_HIGHMEM now which
> > > * is higher than what it was originally
> > > * woken for
> > > */
> >
> > But is it a problem?
> > it should be reset to ZONE_NORMAL in balance_pgdat as high zone isn't populated.
>
> At the very least, it's sloppy.

Agree.

>
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* Looped around to balance_pgdat() again */
> > > order = balance_pgdat()
> > >
> > > Between when all_unreclaimable is set and before before kswapd
> > > goes fully to sleep, a page is freed clearing all_reclaimable so
> > > it rechecks all the zones, find the highest one is not balanced and
> > > skip scheduling.
> >
> > Yes and it could be repeated forever.
>
> Resulting in chewing up large amounts of CPU.
>
> > Apparently, we should fix wit this patch but I have a qustion about this patch.
> >
> > Quote from your patch
> >
> > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > index a76b6cc2..fe854d7 100644
> > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > @@ -2448,7 +2448,6 @@ loop_again:
> > > if (!zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order,
> > > high_wmark_pages(zone), 0, 0)) {
> > > end_zone = i;
> > > - *classzone_idx = i;
> > > break;
> > > }
> > > }
> > > @@ -2528,8 +2527,11 @@ loop_again:
> > > total_scanned > sc.nr_reclaimed + sc.nr_reclaimed / 2)
> > > sc.may_writepage = 1;
> > >
> > > - if (zone->all_unreclaimable)
> > > + if (zone->all_unreclaimable) {
> > > + if (end_zone && end_zone == i)
> > > + end_zone--;
> >
> > Until now, It's good.
> >
> > > continue;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > if (!zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order,
> > > high_wmark_pages(zone), end_zone, 0)) {
> > > @@ -2709,8 +2711,8 @@ static void kswapd_try_to_sleep(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
> > > */
> > > static int kswapd(void *p)
> > > {
> > > - unsigned long order;
> > > - int classzone_idx;
> > > + unsigned long order, new_order;
> > > + int classzone_idx, new_classzone_idx;
> > > pg_data_t *pgdat = (pg_data_t*)p;
> > > struct task_struct *tsk = current;
> > >
> > > @@ -2740,17 +2742,23 @@ static int kswapd(void *p)
> > > tsk->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC | PF_SWAPWRITE | PF_KSWAPD;
> > > set_freezable();
> > >
> > > - order = 0;
> > > - classzone_idx = MAX_NR_ZONES - 1;
> > > + order = new_order = 0;
> > > + classzone_idx = new_classzone_idx = pgdat->nr_zones - 1;
> > > for ( ; ; ) {
> > > - unsigned long new_order;
> > > - int new_classzone_idx;
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > - new_order = pgdat->kswapd_max_order;
> > > - new_classzone_idx = pgdat->classzone_idx;
> > > - pgdat->kswapd_max_order = 0;
> > > - pgdat->classzone_idx = MAX_NR_ZONES - 1;
> > > + /*
> > > + * If the last balance_pgdat was unsuccessful it's unlikely a
> > > + * new request of a similar or harder type will succeed soon
> > > + * so consider going to sleep on the basis we reclaimed at
> > > + */
> > > + if (classzone_idx >= new_classzone_idx && order == new_order) {
> > > + new_order = pgdat->kswapd_max_order;
> > > + new_classzone_idx = pgdat->classzone_idx;
> > > + pgdat->kswapd_max_order = 0;
> > > + pgdat->classzone_idx = pgdat->nr_zones - 1;
> > > + }
> > > +
> >
> > But in this part.
> > Why do we need this?
>
> Lets say it's a fork-heavy workload and it is routinely being woken
> for order-1 allocations and the highest zone is very small. For the
> most part, it's ok because the allocations are being satisfied from
> the lower zones which kswapd has no problem balancing.
>
> However, by reading the information even after failing to
> balance, kswapd continues balancing for order-1 due to reading
> pgdat->kswapd_max_order, each time failing for the highest zone. It
> only takes one wakeup request per balance_pgdat() to keep kswapd
> awake trying to balance the highest zone in a continual loop.

You made balace_pgdat's classzone_idx as communicated back so classzone_idx returned
would be not high zone and in [1/4], you changed that sleeping_prematurely consider only
classzone_idx not nr_zones. So I think it should sleep if low zones is balanced.

>
> By avoiding this read, kswapd will try and go to sleep after checking
> all the watermarks and all_unreclaimable. If the watermarks are ok, it
> will sleep until woken up due to the lower zones hitting their min
> watermarks.
>
> --
> Mel Gorman
> SUSE Labs

--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim