| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CALvZod57YYGJHBvMpbdmysuDPzdEAsv+JM5tK8Qfxgrsb=T-pw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 18:57:41 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix inactive list balancing between NUMA nodes and cgroups
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 7:44 AM Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
>
> During !CONFIG_CGROUP reclaim, we expand the inactive list size if
> it's thrashing on the node that is about to be reclaimed. But when
> cgroups are enabled, we suddenly ignore the node scope and use the
> cgroup scope only. The result is that pressure bleeds between NUMA
> nodes depending on whether cgroups are merely compiled into Linux.
> This behavioral difference is unexpected and undesirable.
>
> When the refault adaptivity of the inactive list was first introduced,
> there were no statistics at the lruvec level - the intersection of
> node and memcg - so it was better than nothing.
>
> But now that we have that infrastructure, use lruvec_page_state() to
> make the list balancing decision always NUMA aware.
>
> Fixes: 2a2e48854d70 ("mm: vmscan: fix IO/refault regression in cache workingset transition")
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 29 +++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 347c9b3b29ac..c9f8afe61ae3 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2138,7 +2138,6 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> * 10TB 320 32GB
> */
> static bool inactive_list_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file,
> - struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> struct scan_control *sc, bool actual_reclaim)
> {
> enum lru_list active_lru = file * LRU_FILE + LRU_ACTIVE;
> @@ -2159,16 +2158,12 @@ static bool inactive_list_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file,
> inactive = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, inactive_lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
> active = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, active_lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
>
> - if (memcg)
> - refaults = memcg_page_state(memcg, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> - else
> - refaults = node_page_state(pgdat, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> -
> /*
> * When refaults are being observed, it means a new workingset
> * is being established. Disable active list protection to get
> * rid of the stale workingset quickly.
> */
> + refaults = lruvec_page_state(lruvec, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> if (file && actual_reclaim && lruvec->refaults != refaults) {
> inactive_ratio = 0;
> } else {
> @@ -2189,12 +2184,10 @@ static bool inactive_list_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file,
> }
>
> static unsigned long shrink_list(enum lru_list lru, unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> - struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> - struct scan_control *sc)
> + struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> {
> if (is_active_lru(lru)) {
> - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, is_file_lru(lru),
> - memcg, sc, true))
> + if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, is_file_lru(lru), sc, true))
> shrink_active_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -2293,7 +2286,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> * anonymous pages on the LRU in eligible zones.
> * Otherwise, the small LRU gets thrashed.
> */
> - if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, memcg, sc, false) &&
> + if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, false) &&
> lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, sc->reclaim_idx)
> >> sc->priority) {
> scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> @@ -2311,7 +2304,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> * lruvec even if it has plenty of old anonymous pages unless the
> * system is under heavy pressure.
> */
> - if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, true, memcg, sc, false) &&
> + if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, true, sc, false) &&
> lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, sc->reclaim_idx) >> sc->priority) {
> scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
> goto out;
> @@ -2515,7 +2508,7 @@ static void shrink_node_memcg(struct pglist_data *pgdat, struct mem_cgroup *memc
> nr[lru] -= nr_to_scan;
>
> nr_reclaimed += shrink_list(lru, nr_to_scan,
> - lruvec, memcg, sc);
> + lruvec, sc);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -2582,7 +2575,7 @@ static void shrink_node_memcg(struct pglist_data *pgdat, struct mem_cgroup *memc
> * Even if we did not try to evict anon pages at all, we want to
> * rebalance the anon lru active/inactive ratio.
> */
> - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, memcg, sc, true))
> + if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, true))
> shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, lruvec,
> sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON);
> }
> @@ -2985,12 +2978,8 @@ static void snapshot_refaults(struct mem_cgroup *root_memcg, pg_data_t *pgdat)
> unsigned long refaults;
> struct lruvec *lruvec;
>
> - if (memcg)
> - refaults = memcg_page_state(memcg, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> - else
> - refaults = node_page_state(pgdat, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> -
> lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(pgdat, memcg);
> + refaults = lruvec_page_state_local(lruvec, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> lruvec->refaults = refaults;
> } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(root_memcg, memcg, NULL)));
> }
> @@ -3346,7 +3335,7 @@ static void age_active_anon(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> do {
> struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(pgdat, memcg);
>
> - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, memcg, sc, true))
> + if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, true))
> shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, lruvec,
> sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON);
>
> --
> 2.21.0
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists