linux-kernel - Re: [v7 PATCH 2/2] mm: vmscan: correct some vmscan counters for THP swapout

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]

Message-ID: <87sgsy6prv.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 May 2019 08:57:40 +0800
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:     Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     <hannes@...xchg.org>, <mhocko@...e.com>,
        <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        <josef@...icpanda.com>, <hughd@...gle.com>, <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        <hdanton@...a.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v7 PATCH 2/2] mm: vmscan: correct some vmscan counters for THP swapout

Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com> writes:

> Since commit bd4c82c22c36 ("mm, THP, swap: delay splitting THP after
> swapped out"), THP can be swapped out in a whole.  But, nr_reclaimed
> and some other vm counters still get inc'ed by one even though a whole
> THP (512 pages) gets swapped out.
>
> This doesn't make too much sense to memory reclaim.  For example, direct
> reclaim may just need reclaim SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages, reclaiming one THP
> could fulfill it.  But, if nr_reclaimed is not increased correctly,
> direct reclaim may just waste time to reclaim more pages,
> SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * 512 pages in worst case.
>
> And, it may cause pgsteal_{kswapd|direct} is greater than
> pgscan_{kswapd|direct}, like the below:
>
> pgsteal_kswapd 122933
> pgsteal_direct 26600225
> pgscan_kswapd 174153
> pgscan_direct 14678312
>
> nr_reclaimed and nr_scanned must be fixed in parallel otherwise it would
> break some page reclaim logic, e.g.
>
> vmpressure: this looks at the scanned/reclaimed ratio so it won't
> change semantics as long as scanned & reclaimed are fixed in parallel.
>
> compaction/reclaim: compaction wants a certain number of physical pages
> freed up before going back to compacting.
>
> kswapd priority raising: kswapd raises priority if we scan fewer pages
> than the reclaim target (which itself is obviously expressed in order-0
> pages). As a result, kswapd can falsely raise its aggressiveness even
> when it's making great progress.
>
> Other than nr_scanned and nr_reclaimed, some other counters, e.g.
> pgactivate, nr_skipped, nr_ref_keep and nr_unmap_fail need to be fixed
> too since they are user visible via cgroup, /proc/vmstat or trace
> points, otherwise they would be underreported.
>
> When isolating pages from LRUs, nr_taken has been accounted in base
> page, but nr_scanned and nr_skipped are still accounted in THP.  It
> doesn't make too much sense too since this may cause trace point
> underreport the numbers as well.
>
> So accounting those counters in base page instead of accounting THP as
> one page.
>
> nr_dirty, nr_unqueued_dirty, nr_congested and nr_writeback are used by
> file cache, so they are not impacted by THP swap.
>
> This change may result in lower steal/scan ratio in some cases since
> THP may get split during page reclaim, then a part of tail pages get
> reclaimed instead of the whole 512 pages, but nr_scanned is accounted
> by 512, particularly for direct reclaim.  But, this should be not a
> significant issue.
>
> Cc: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>

Looks good to me!  Thanks for your effort!

Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying