linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/34] mm, vmscan: make kswapd reclaim in terms of nodes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:00:51 +0100
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To:     Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/34] mm, vmscan: make kswapd reclaim in terms of nodes

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 07:55:08PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > 
> > > This patch seems to hurt FA_DUMP functionality. This behaviour is not
> > > seen on v4.7 but only after this patch.
> > > 
> > > So when a kernel on a multinode machine with memblock_reserve() such
> > > that most of the nodes have zero available memory, kswapd seems to be
> > > consuming 100% of the time.
> > > 
> > 
> > Why is FA_DUMP specifically the trigger? If the nodes have zero available
> > memory then is the zone_populated() check failing when FA_DUMP is enabled? If
> > so, that would both allow kswapd to wake and stay awake.
> > 
> 
> The trigger is memblock_reserve() for the complete node memory.  And
> this is exactly what FA_DUMP does.  Here again the node has memory but
> its all reserved so there is no free memory in the node.
> 
> Did you mean populated_zone() when you said zone_populated or have I
> mistaken? populated_zone() does return 1 since it checks for
> zone->present_pages.
> 

Yes, I meant populated_zone(). Using present pages may have hidden
a long-lived corner case as it was unexpected that an entire node
would be reserved. The old code happened to survive *probably* because
pgdat_reclaimable would look false and kswapd checks for pgdat being
balanced would happen to do the right thing in this case.

Can you check if something like this works?

diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
index d572b78b65e1..cf64a5456cf6 100644
--- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
+++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
@@ -830,7 +830,7 @@ unsigned long __init node_memmap_size_bytes(int, unsigned long, unsigned long);
 
 static inline int populated_zone(struct zone *zone)
 {
-	return (!!zone->present_pages);
+	return (!!zone->managed_pages);
 }
 
 extern int movable_zone;

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs