[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1706041520410.21195@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 15:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] mm, vmscan: avoid thrashing anon lru when free + file
is low
On Fri, 2 Jun 2017, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 1 May 2017 14:34:21 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > The purpose of the code that commit 623762517e23 ("revert 'mm: vmscan: do
> > not swap anon pages just because free+file is low'") reintroduces is to
> > prefer swapping anonymous memory rather than trashing the file lru.
> >
> > If the anonymous inactive lru for the set of eligible zones is considered
> > low, however, or the length of the list for the given reclaim priority
> > does not allow for effective anonymous-only reclaiming, then avoid
> > forcing SCAN_ANON. Forcing SCAN_ANON will end up thrashing the small
> > list and leave unreclaimed memory on the file lrus.
> >
> > If the inactive list is insufficient, fallback to balanced reclaim so the
> > file lru doesn't remain untouched.
> >
>
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c~mm-vmscan-avoid-thrashing-anon-lru-when-free-file-is-low-fix
> +++ a/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2233,7 +2233,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec
> * anonymous pages on the LRU in eligible zones.
> * Otherwise, the small LRU gets thrashed.
> */
> - if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, false) &&
> + if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, memcg, sc, false) &&
> lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, sc->reclaim_idx)
> >> sc->priority) {
> scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
>
> Worried. Did you send the correct version?
>
The patch was written before commit 2a2e48854d70 ("mm: vmscan: fix
IO/refault regression in cache workingset transition") was merged and
changed inactive_list_is_low().
Your rebase looks good. It could have used NULL instead of memcg since
this is only for global_reclaim() and memcg will always be NULL here, but
that's just personal preference.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists