[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YW/Zf/s/CtRFlJ87@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 10:55:27 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: skip current when memcg reclaim
On Wed 20-10-21 15:33:39, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
[...]
> Do you mean that direct reclaim should succeed for the first round
> reclaim within which memcg get protected by memory.low and would NOT
> retry by setting memcg_low_reclaim to true?
Yes, this is the semantic of low limit protection in the upstream
kernel. Have a look at do_try_to_free_pages and how it sets
memcg_low_reclaim only if there were no pages reclaimed.
> It is not true in android
> like system, where reclaim always failed and introduce lmk and even
> OOM.
I am not familiar with android specific changes to the upstream reclaim
logic. You should be investigating why the reclaim couldn't make a
forward progress (aka reclaim pages) from non-protected memcgs. There
are tracepoints you can use (generally vmscan prefix).
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists