| 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: <CALvZod4pYjeDc97R=8C0UVOxi-hOcXznxy5OrX2e-ESm411DUg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 14:16:29 -0800
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, 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 3/3] mm: vmscan: enforce inactive:active ratio at the
reclaim root
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:29 PM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 12:53 PM Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
> >
> > We split the LRU lists into inactive and an active parts to maximize
> > workingset protection while allowing just enough inactive cache space
> > to faciltate readahead and writeback for one-off file accesses (e.g. a
> > linear scan through a file, or logging); or just enough inactive anon
> > to maintain recent reference information when reclaim needs to swap.
> >
> > With cgroups and their nested LRU lists, we currently don't do this
> > correctly. While recursive cgroup reclaim establishes a relative LRU
> > order among the pages of all involved cgroups, inactive:active size
> > decisions are done on a per-cgroup level. As a result, we'll reclaim a
> > cgroup's workingset when it doesn't have cold pages, even when one of
> > its siblings has plenty of it that should be reclaimed first.
> >
> > For example: workload A has 50M worth of hot cache but doesn't do any
> > one-off file accesses; meanwhile, parallel workload B scans files and
> > rarely accesses the same page twice.
> >
> > If these workloads were to run in an uncgrouped system, A would be
> > protected from the high rate of cache faults from B. But if they were
> > put in parallel cgroups for memory accounting purposes, B's fast cache
> > fault rate would push out the hot cache pages of A. This is unexpected
> > and undesirable - the "scan resistance" of the page cache is broken.
> >
> > This patch moves inactive:active size balancing decisions to the root
> > of reclaim - the same level where the LRU order is established.
> >
> > It does this by looking at the recursize size of the inactive and the
> > active file sets of the cgroup subtree at the beginning of the reclaim
> > cycle, and then making a decision - scan or skip active pages - that
> > applies throughout the entire run and to every cgroup involved.
>
> Oh ok, this answer my question on previous patch. The reclaim root
> looks at the full tree inactive and active count to make decisions and
> thus active list of some descendant cgroup will be protected from the
> inactive list of its sibling.
>
> >
> > With that in place, in the test above, the VM will recognize that
> > there are plenty of inactive pages in the combined cache set of
> > workloads A and B and prefer the one-off cache in B over the hot pages
> > in A. The scan resistance of the cache is restored.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Forgot to add:
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
>
> BTW no love for the anon memory? The whole "workingset" mechanism only
> works for file pages. Are there any plans to extend it for anon as
> well?
>
> > ---
> > include/linux/mmzone.h | 4 +-
> > mm/vmscan.c | 185 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> > 2 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> > index 7a09087e8c77..454a230ad417 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> > @@ -229,12 +229,12 @@ enum lru_list {
> >
> > #define for_each_evictable_lru(lru) for (lru = 0; lru <= LRU_ACTIVE_FILE; lru++)
> >
> > -static inline int is_file_lru(enum lru_list lru)
> > +static inline bool is_file_lru(enum lru_list lru)
> > {
> > return (lru == LRU_INACTIVE_FILE || lru == LRU_ACTIVE_FILE);
> > }
> >
> > -static inline int is_active_lru(enum lru_list lru)
> > +static inline bool is_active_lru(enum lru_list lru)
> > {
> > return (lru == LRU_ACTIVE_ANON || lru == LRU_ACTIVE_FILE);
> > }
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index 527617ee9b73..df859b1d583c 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -79,6 +79,13 @@ struct scan_control {
> > */
> > struct mem_cgroup *target_mem_cgroup;
> >
> > + /* Can active pages be deactivated as part of reclaim? */
> > +#define DEACTIVATE_ANON 1
> > +#define DEACTIVATE_FILE 2
> > + unsigned int may_deactivate:2;
> > + unsigned int force_deactivate:1;
> > + unsigned int skipped_deactivate:1;
> > +
> > /* Writepage batching in laptop mode; RECLAIM_WRITE */
> > unsigned int may_writepage:1;
> >
> > @@ -101,6 +108,9 @@ struct scan_control {
> > /* One of the zones is ready for compaction */
> > unsigned int compaction_ready:1;
> >
> > + /* There is easily reclaimable cold cache in the current node */
> > + unsigned int cache_trim_mode:1;
> > +
> > /* The file pages on the current node are dangerously low */
> > unsigned int file_is_tiny:1;
> >
> > @@ -2154,6 +2164,20 @@ unsigned long reclaim_pages(struct list_head *page_list)
> > return nr_reclaimed;
> > }
> >
> > +static unsigned long shrink_list(enum lru_list lru, unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > + struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> > +{
> > + if (is_active_lru(lru)) {
> > + if (sc->may_deactivate & (1 << is_file_lru(lru)))
> > + shrink_active_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);
> > + else
> > + sc->skipped_deactivate = 1;
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return shrink_inactive_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * The inactive anon list should be small enough that the VM never has
> > * to do too much work.
> > @@ -2182,59 +2206,25 @@ unsigned long reclaim_pages(struct list_head *page_list)
> > * 1TB 101 10GB
> > * 10TB 320 32GB
> > */
> > -static bool inactive_list_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file,
> > - struct scan_control *sc, bool trace)
> > +static bool inactive_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, enum lru_list inactive_lru)
> > {
> > - enum lru_list active_lru = file * LRU_FILE + LRU_ACTIVE;
> > - struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> > - enum lru_list inactive_lru = file * LRU_FILE;
> > + enum lru_list active_lru = inactive_lru + LRU_ACTIVE;
> > unsigned long inactive, active;
> > unsigned long inactive_ratio;
> > - struct lruvec *target_lruvec;
> > - unsigned long refaults;
> > unsigned long gb;
> >
> > - inactive = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, inactive_lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
> > - active = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, active_lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
> > + inactive = lruvec_page_state(lruvec, inactive_lru);
> > + active = lruvec_page_state(lruvec, active_lru);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * 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.
> > - */
> > - target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat);
> > - refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> > - if (file && target_lruvec->refaults != refaults) {
> > - inactive_ratio = 0;
> > - } else {
> > - gb = (inactive + active) >> (30 - PAGE_SHIFT);
> > - if (gb)
> > - inactive_ratio = int_sqrt(10 * gb);
> > - else
> > - inactive_ratio = 1;
> > - }
> > -
> > - if (trace)
> > - trace_mm_vmscan_inactive_list_is_low(pgdat->node_id, sc->reclaim_idx,
> > - lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, inactive_lru, MAX_NR_ZONES), inactive,
> > - lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, active_lru, MAX_NR_ZONES), active,
> > - inactive_ratio, file);
> > + gb = (inactive + active) >> (30 - PAGE_SHIFT);
> > + if (gb)
> > + inactive_ratio = int_sqrt(10 * gb);
> > + else
> > + inactive_ratio = 1;
> >
> > return inactive * inactive_ratio < active;
> > }
> >
> > -static unsigned long shrink_list(enum lru_list lru, unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > - struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> > -{
> > - if (is_active_lru(lru)) {
> > - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, is_file_lru(lru), sc, true))
> > - shrink_active_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);
> > - return 0;
> > - }
> > -
> > - return shrink_inactive_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);
> > -}
> > -
> > enum scan_balance {
> > SCAN_EQUAL,
> > SCAN_FRACT,
> > @@ -2296,28 +2286,17 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc,
> >
> > /*
> > * If the system is almost out of file pages, force-scan anon.
> > - * But only if there are enough inactive anonymous pages on
> > - * the LRU. Otherwise, the small LRU gets thrashed.
> > */
> > - if (sc->file_is_tiny &&
> > - !inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, false) &&
> > - lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON,
> > - sc->reclaim_idx) >> sc->priority) {
> > + if (sc->file_is_tiny) {
> > scan_balance = SCAN_ANON;
> > goto out;
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > - * If there is enough inactive page cache, i.e. if the size of the
> > - * inactive list is greater than that of the active list *and* the
> > - * inactive list actually has some pages to scan on this priority, we
> > - * do not reclaim anything from the anonymous working set right now.
> > - * Without the second condition we could end up never scanning an
> > - * lruvec even if it has plenty of old anonymous pages unless the
> > - * system is under heavy pressure.
> > + * If there is enough inactive page cache, we do not reclaim
> > + * anything from the anonymous working right now.
> > */
> > - if (!inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, true, sc, false) &&
> > - lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, sc->reclaim_idx) >> sc->priority) {
> > + if (sc->cache_trim_mode) {
> > scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
> > goto out;
> > }
> > @@ -2582,7 +2561,7 @@ static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> > * Even if we did not try to evict anon pages at all, we want to
> > * rebalance the anon lru active/inactive ratio.
> > */
> > - if (total_swap_pages && inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, true))
> > + if (total_swap_pages && inactive_is_low(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON))
> > shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, lruvec,
> > sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON);
> > }
> > @@ -2722,6 +2701,7 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> > unsigned long nr_reclaimed, nr_scanned;
> > struct lruvec *target_lruvec;
> > bool reclaimable = false;
> > + unsigned long file;
> >
> > target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat);
> >
> > @@ -2731,6 +2711,44 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> > nr_reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
> > nr_scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon
> > + * and file LRU lists.
> > + */
> > + if (!sc->force_deactivate) {
> > + unsigned long refaults;
> > +
> > + if (inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON))
> > + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_ANON;
> > + else
> > + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_ANON;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * When refaults are being observed, it means a new
> > + * workingset is being established. Deactivate to get
> > + * rid of any stale active pages quickly.
> > + */
> > + refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec,
> > + WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE);
> > + if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults ||
> > + inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE))
> > + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_FILE;
> > + else
> > + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_FILE;
> > + } else
> > + sc->may_deactivate = DEACTIVATE_ANON | DEACTIVATE_FILE;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If we have plenty of inactive file pages that aren't
> > + * thrashing, try to reclaim those first before touching
> > + * anonymous pages.
> > + */
> > + file = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE);
> > + if (file >> sc->priority && !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_FILE))
> > + sc->cache_trim_mode = 1;
> > + else
> > + sc->cache_trim_mode = 0;
> > +
> > /*
> > * Prevent the reclaimer from falling into the cache trap: as
> > * cache pages start out inactive, every cache fault will tip
> > @@ -2741,10 +2759,9 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> > * anon pages. Try to detect this based on file LRU size.
> > */
> > if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) {
> > - unsigned long file;
> > - unsigned long free;
> > - int z;
> > unsigned long total_high_wmark = 0;
> > + unsigned long free, anon;
> > + int z;
> >
> > free = sum_zone_node_page_state(pgdat->node_id, NR_FREE_PAGES);
> > file = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_FILE) +
> > @@ -2758,7 +2775,17 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> > total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone);
> > }
> >
> > - sc->file_is_tiny = file + free <= total_high_wmark;
> > + /*
> > + * Consider anon: if that's low too, this isn't a
> > + * runaway file reclaim problem, but rather just
> > + * extreme pressure. Reclaim as per usual then.
> > + */
> > + anon = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
> > +
> > + sc->file_is_tiny =
> > + file + free <= total_high_wmark &&
> > + !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_ANON) &&
> > + anon >> sc->priority;
> > }
> >
> > shrink_node_memcgs(pgdat, sc);
> > @@ -3062,9 +3089,27 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> > if (sc->compaction_ready)
> > return 1;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * We make inactive:active ratio decisions based on the node's
> > + * composition of memory, but a restrictive reclaim_idx or a
> > + * memory.low cgroup setting can exempt large amounts of
> > + * memory from reclaim. Neither of which are very common, so
> > + * instead of doing costly eligibility calculations of the
> > + * entire cgroup subtree up front, we assume the estimates are
> > + * good, and retry with forcible deactivation if that fails.
> > + */
> > + if (sc->skipped_deactivate) {
> > + sc->priority = initial_priority;
> > + sc->force_deactivate = 1;
> > + sc->skipped_deactivate = 0;
> > + goto retry;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Not really an objection but in the worst case this will double the
> cost of direct reclaim.
>
> > /* Untapped cgroup reserves? Don't OOM, retry. */
> > if (sc->memcg_low_skipped) {
> > sc->priority = initial_priority;
> > + sc->force_deactivate = 0;
> > + sc->skipped_deactivate = 0;
> > sc->memcg_low_reclaim = 1;
> > sc->memcg_low_skipped = 0;
> > goto retry;
> > @@ -3347,18 +3392,20 @@ static void age_active_anon(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> > struct scan_control *sc)
> > {
> > struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
> > + struct lruvec *lruvec;
> >
> > if (!total_swap_pages)
> > return;
> >
> > + lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(NULL, pgdat);
> > + if (!inactive_is_low(lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON))
> > + return;
> > +
> > memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, NULL, NULL);
> > do {
> > - struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat);
> > -
> > - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, false, sc, true))
> > - shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, lruvec,
> > - sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON);
> > -
> > + lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat);
> > + shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, lruvec,
> > + sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON);
> > memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(NULL, memcg, NULL);
> > } while (memcg);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.24.0
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists