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  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:   Mon, 16 Jan 2017 20:33:16 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:     Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] mm, vmscan: consider eligible zones in get_scan_count

From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>

get_scan_count considers the whole node LRU size when
- doing SCAN_FILE due to many page cache inactive pages
- calculating the number of pages to scan

in both cases this might lead to unexpected behavior especially on 32b
systems where we can expect lowmem memory pressure very often.

A large highmem zone can easily distort SCAN_FILE heuristic because
there might be only few file pages from the eligible zones on the node
lru and we would still enforce file lru scanning which can lead to
trashing while we could still scan anonymous pages.

The later use of lruvec_lru_size can be problematic as well. Especially
when there are not many pages from the eligible zones. We would have to
skip over many pages to find anything to reclaim but shrink_node_memcg
would only reduce the remaining number to scan by SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX
at maximum. Therefore we can end up going over a large LRU many times
without actually having chance to reclaim much if anything at all. The
closer we are out of memory on lowmem zone the worse the problem will
be.

Fix this by filtering out all the ineligible zones when calculating the
lru size for both paths and consider only sc->reclaim_idx zones.

Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 1cb0ebdef305..a88e222784ea 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -2234,7 +2234,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 	 * system is under heavy pressure.
 	 */
 	if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, true, sc, false) &&
-	    lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, MAX_NR_ZONES) >> sc->priority) {
+	    lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, sc->reclaim_idx) >> sc->priority) {
 		scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
 		goto out;
 	}
@@ -2301,7 +2301,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
 			unsigned long size;
 			unsigned long scan;
 
-			size = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, lru, MAX_NR_ZONES);
+			size = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
 			scan = size >> sc->priority;
 
 			if (!scan && pass && force_scan)
-- 
2.11.0

Powered by blists - more mailing lists