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: <20210520065355.2736558-6-yuzhao@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 May 2021 00:53:46 -0600
From:   Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Donald Carr <sirspudd@...il.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-angel@...dex.ru>,
        Marcus Seyfarth <m.seyfarth@...il.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        Michael Larabel <michael@...haellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <michel@...pinasse.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...ts.01.org,
        page-reclaim@...gle.com, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@...dex.ru>
Subject: [PATCH v3 05/14] mm/vmscan.c: refactor shrink_node()

Heuristics that determine scan balance between anon and file LRUs are
rather independent. Move them into a separate function to improve
readability.

Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@...dex.ru>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 186 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 5199b9696bab..2339459c97d4 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -2421,6 +2421,103 @@ enum scan_balance {
 	SCAN_FILE,
 };
 
+static void prepare_scan_count(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
+{
+	unsigned long file;
+	struct lruvec *target_lruvec;
+
+	target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat);
+
+	/*
+	 * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs.
+	 */
+	spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock);
+	sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost;
+	sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost;
+	spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock);
+
+	/*
+	 * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon
+	 * and file LRU lists.
+	 */
+	if (!sc->force_deactivate) {
+		unsigned long refaults;
+
+		refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec,
+				WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON);
+		if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] ||
+			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_FILE);
+		if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] ||
+		    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, NR_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
+	 * the scan balance towards the file LRU.  And as the file LRU
+	 * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references.
+	 * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny
+	 * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than
+	 * anon pages.  Try to detect this based on file LRU size.
+	 */
+	if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) {
+		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) +
+			   node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
+
+		for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) {
+			struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z];
+
+			if (!managed_zone(zone))
+				continue;
+
+			total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone);
+		}
+
+		/*
+		 * 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;
+	}
+}
+
 /*
  * Determine how aggressively the anon and file LRU lists should be
  * scanned.  The relative value of each set of LRU lists is determined
@@ -2866,7 +2963,6 @@ static void 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);
 
@@ -2876,93 +2972,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
 	nr_reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
 	nr_scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
 
-	/*
-	 * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs.
-	 */
-	spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock);
-	sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost;
-	sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost;
-	spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock);
-
-	/*
-	 * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon
-	 * and file LRU lists.
-	 */
-	if (!sc->force_deactivate) {
-		unsigned long refaults;
-
-		refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec,
-				WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON);
-		if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] ||
-			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_FILE);
-		if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] ||
-		    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, NR_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
-	 * the scan balance towards the file LRU.  And as the file LRU
-	 * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references.
-	 * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny
-	 * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than
-	 * anon pages.  Try to detect this based on file LRU size.
-	 */
-	if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) {
-		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) +
-			   node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
-
-		for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) {
-			struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z];
-			if (!managed_zone(zone))
-				continue;
-
-			total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone);
-		}
-
-		/*
-		 * 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;
-	}
+	prepare_scan_count(pgdat, sc);
 
 	shrink_node_memcgs(pgdat, sc);
 
-- 
2.31.1.751.gd2f1c929bd-goog

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ