linux-kernel - [v4 PATCH 11/11] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority

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: <20210121230621.654304-12-shy828301@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:06:21 -0800
From:   Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
To:     guro@...com, ktkhai@...tuozzo.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        david@...morbit.com, hannes@...xchg.org, mhocko@...e.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     shy828301@...il.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [v4 PATCH 11/11] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority

The number of deferred objects might get windup to an absurd number, and it results in
clamp of slab objects.  It is undesirable for sustaining workingset.

So shrink deferred objects proportional to priority and cap nr_deferred to twice of
cache items.

The idea is borrowed fron Dave Chinner's patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191031234618.15403-13-david@fromorbit.com/

Tested with kernel build and vfs metadata heavy workload, no regression is spotted
so far.  But it still may have regression for some corner cases.

Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 40 +++++-----------------------------------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index e73f200ffd2d..bb254d39339f 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -659,7 +659,6 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
 	 */
 	nr = count_nr_deferred(shrinker, shrinkctl);
 
-	total_scan = nr;
 	if (shrinker->seeks) {
 		delta = freeable >> priority;
 		delta *= 4;
@@ -673,37 +672,9 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
 		delta = freeable / 2;
 	}
 
+	total_scan = nr >> priority;
 	total_scan += delta;
-	if (total_scan < 0) {
-		pr_err("shrink_slab: %pS negative objects to delete nr=%ld\n",
-		       shrinker->scan_objects, total_scan);
-		total_scan = freeable;
-		next_deferred = nr;
-	} else
-		next_deferred = total_scan;
-
-	/*
-	 * We need to avoid excessive windup on filesystem shrinkers
-	 * due to large numbers of GFP_NOFS allocations causing the
-	 * shrinkers to return -1 all the time. This results in a large
-	 * nr being built up so when a shrink that can do some work
-	 * comes along it empties the entire cache due to nr >>>
-	 * freeable. This is bad for sustaining a working set in
-	 * memory.
-	 *
-	 * Hence only allow the shrinker to scan the entire cache when
-	 * a large delta change is calculated directly.
-	 */
-	if (delta < freeable / 4)
-		total_scan = min(total_scan, freeable / 2);
-
-	/*
-	 * Avoid risking looping forever due to too large nr value:
-	 * never try to free more than twice the estimate number of
-	 * freeable entries.
-	 */
-	if (total_scan > freeable * 2)
-		total_scan = freeable * 2;
+	total_scan = min(total_scan, (2 * freeable));
 
 	trace_mm_shrink_slab_start(shrinker, shrinkctl, nr,
 				   freeable, delta, total_scan, priority);
@@ -742,10 +713,9 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
 		cond_resched();
 	}
 
-	if (next_deferred >= scanned)
-		next_deferred -= scanned;
-	else
-		next_deferred = 0;
+	next_deferred = max_t(long, (nr - scanned), 0) + total_scan;
+	next_deferred = min(next_deferred, (2 * freeable));
+
 	/*
 	 * move the unused scan count back into the shrinker in a
 	 * manner that handles concurrent updates.
-- 
2.26.2