linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm: scale kswapd watermarks in proportion to memory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:39:31 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: scale kswapd watermarks in proportion to memory

On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Johannes Weiner wrote:

> In machines with 140G of memory and enterprise flash storage, we have
> seen read and write bursts routinely exceed the kswapd watermarks and
> cause thundering herds in direct reclaim. Unfortunately, the only way
> to tune kswapd aggressiveness is through adjusting min_free_kbytes -
> the system's emergency reserves - which is entirely unrelated to the
> system's latency requirements. In order to get kswapd to maintain a
> 250M buffer of free memory, the emergency reserves need to be set to
> 1G. That is a lot of memory wasted for no good reason.
> 
> On the other hand, it's reasonable to assume that allocation bursts
> and overall allocation concurrency scale with memory capacity, so it
> makes sense to make kswapd aggressiveness a function of that as well.
> 
> Change the kswapd watermark scale factor from the currently fixed 25%
> of the tunable emergency reserve to a tunable 0.001% of memory.
> 
> Beyond 1G of memory, this will produce bigger watermark steps than the
> current formula in default settings. Ensure that the new formula never
> chooses steps smaller than that, i.e. 25% of the emergency reserve.
> 
> On a 140G machine, this raises the default watermark steps - the
> distance between min and low, and low and high - from 16M to 143M.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>