From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
To: Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
david@kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org,
vbabka@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com,
mhocko@suse.com, kasong@tencent.com, qi.zheng@linux.dev,
axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com,
weixugc@google.com, chrisl@kernel.org, nphamcs@gmail.com,
baoquan.he@linux.dev, youngjun.park@lge.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, rientjes@google.com,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/vmscan: reduce lru_lock contention via vmstat-derived scan-balance cost
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 09:35:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ameIpQtXv9pC2aaT@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260727162550.2032-4-usama.arif@linux.dev>
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 09:23:25AM -0700, Usama Arif wrote:
> The anon/file scan balance in get_scan_count() is driven by two scalars
> in struct lruvec, anon_cost and file_cost, accumulated by every reclaim
> producer under lruvec->lru_lock. The acquisition sites for cost work
> specifically are:
>
> - shrink_inactive_list() re-takes lru_lock at function exit purely
> to call lru_note_cost_unlock_irq() with (nr_pageout, nr_scanned -
> nr_reclaimed). One acquisition per inactive shrink.
> - shrink_active_list() does the same with (0, nr_rotated). One
> acquisition per active shrink.
> - workingset_refault() takes the lock via folio_lruvec_lock_irq()
> purely to record the refault cost. One acquisition per refault.
> - prepare_scan_control() takes lru_lock just to snapshot the two
> scalars into sc->{anon,file}_cost.
> - lru_note_cost_unlock_irq() itself walks parent_lruvec and
> re-acquires lru_lock on each ancestor to propagate the update,
> adding O(memcg-depth) acquisitions per producer call.
>
> This hurts because lru_lock is already a heavy contention point on
> memory-heavy workloads: every isolate_lru_folios(), move_folios_to_lru()
> and folio_add_lru() takes it. The cost work itself is trivial (two
> scalar bumps and one comparison), but it contends with and causes
> contention for actual LRU manipulation. The parent_lruvec() walk also
> multiplies cost-update overhead by memcg hierarchy depth.
>
> The balance formula for anon and file, respectively, is this:
>
> cost = nr_io * SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX + nr_rotated
>
> Instead of recording cost and running averaging logic directly when
> these events occur, snapshot running vmstat counters once per reclaim
> cycle and derive the balance from event deltas since the last run.
>
> Use PGROTATE_* from the preceding patch for the rotation input.
> WORKINGSET_RESTORE_* and NR_VMSCAN_WRITE provide the remaining event
> counters. Charge NR_VMSCAN_WRITE through lruvec stats so all inputs can
> be sampled per lruvec and aggregated through the memcg hierarchy. This
> is overall cheaper and has fewer lock acquisition sites.
>
> Moving accumulation and decay to the reclaim side also improves the cost
> model across reclaim gaps. With producer-side decay, events that happen
> while reclaim is idle still age each other before reclaim ever samples
> the costs. If a workload refaults a large anon set and then a smaller
> file set before reclaim runs again, the later file activity can age the
> earlier anon activity out of the cost model. The new scheme observes the
> whole between-reclaim delta and decays anon and file proportionally, so
> the scan-balance history better represents what happened since the last
> reclaim pass.
>
> A dedicated per-lruvec spinlock, cost_lock, serialises the delta
> extraction, the cost->count update and the halving loop against
> concurrent reclaimers in the same memcg+node.
>
> NR_VMSCAN_WRITE is accounted at writeout(), so reclaim_stat.nr_pageout is
> no longer needed and is removed.
>
> memcg-v1's memory.stat anon_cost/file_cost is now sourced from
> cost[].count instead of the removed lruvec anon_cost/file_cost fields.
> The reported values only refresh when prepare_scan_control() runs and
> are bounded at ~lrusize/4 by the halving loop; the scan-balance signal
> they express is unchanged.
>
> Under pure MGLRU the scan-balance signal itself is not consumed (both
> prepare_scan_control() and get_scan_count() are short-circuited on the
> MGLRU paths, and MGLRU's own type/tier selection comes from read_ctrl_pos()
> on lrugen->{avg_refaulted,avg_total,refaulted,evicted}, not from
> anon_cost/file_cost). NR_VMSCAN_WRITE naturally covers writeout from
> either reclaim implementation. The preceding patch also bumps
> PGROTATE_{ANON,FILE} from evict_folios(), so rotation-driven reclaim
> work is accounted consistently across both implementations.
>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>
I see you already added my Ack here. Sounds good.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-27 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-27 16:23 [PATCH v5 0/3] mm/vmscan: reduce lru_lock contention via vmstat-derived scan-balance cost Usama Arif
2026-07-27 16:23 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] mm/vmstat, mm/memcontrol: add _monotonic vmstat readers Usama Arif
2026-07-27 16:23 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] mm/vmscan: add pgrotate_anon and pgrotate_file vmstat counters Usama Arif
2026-07-27 16:33 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-07-27 17:23 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-07-27 16:23 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/vmscan: reduce lru_lock contention via vmstat-derived scan-balance cost Usama Arif
2026-07-27 16:35 ` Shakeel Butt [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=ameIpQtXv9pC2aaT@linux.dev \
--to=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baoquan.he@linux.dev \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.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=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=youngjun.park@lge.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.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