| 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: <20211201172920.GA8492@magnolia>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 09:29:20 -0800
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc: Alexey Avramov <hakavlad@...ox.lv>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
Linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: vmscan: Reduce throttling due to a failure to
make progress
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 02:00:05PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 03:38:36AM +0900, Alexey Avramov wrote:
> > >due to the
> > >underlying storage.
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > >and send me the trace.out file please?
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FBjAmXwXakWPPjcn6K-B50S04vyySQO6/view
> >
> > Typical entries:
> >
> > Timer-10841 [006] ..... 14341.639496: mm_vmscan_throttled: nid=0 usec_timeout=100000 usect_delayed=100000 reason=VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK
> > gmain-1246 [004] ..... 14341.639498: mm_vmscan_throttled: nid=0 usec_timeout=100000 usect_delayed=100000 reason=VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK
>
> Ok, the bulk of the stalls were for the same reason. Using a laptop with
> slower storge (SSD but slower than the first laptop), the stalls were
> almost all from the same reason and from one callsite -- shrink_node.
>
> I've included another patch below against 5.16-rc1 but it'll apply to
> 5.16-rc3. Using the same test I get
>
> Swap off
> --------
> Kernel: 5.15
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,432: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,432: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: some cpu 4.72 2.68 1.25
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: some io 7.63 3.29 1.03
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: full io 4.28 1.91 0.63
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,433: some memory 13.28 4.80 1.20
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,434: full memory 12.22 4.44 1.11
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,434: Stall times for the last 45.5s:
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,434: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,434: some cpu 1.8s, avg 4.0%
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: some io 2.9s, avg 6.5%
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: full io 1.8s, avg 4.0%
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: some memory 4.4s, avg 9.6%
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435: full memory 4.0s, avg 8.8%
> 2021-12-01 13:06:23,435:
>
> Kernel: 5.16-rc1
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,662: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: some cpu 1.97 1.84 0.80
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: some io 49.60 26.97 13.26
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: full io 45.91 24.56 12.13
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: some memory 98.49 93.94 54.09
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,663: full memory 98.49 93.75 53.82
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: Stall times for the last 291.0s:
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: some cpu 2.3s, avg 0.8%
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: some io 57.2s, avg 19.7%
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: full io 52.9s, avg 18.2%
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: some memory 244.8s, avg 84.1%
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664: full memory 242.9s, avg 83.5%
> 2021-12-01 13:13:33,664:
>
> Kernel: 5.16-rc1-v3r4
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: some cpu 2.91 2.04 0.97
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: some io 6.59 2.94 1.00
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: full io 3.95 1.82 0.62
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,910: some memory 10.29 3.67 0.90
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: full memory 9.82 3.46 0.84
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: Stall times for the last 44.4s:
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: some cpu 1.2s, avg 2.7%
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: some io 2.4s, avg 5.4%
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: full io 1.5s, avg 3.5%
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: some memory 3.2s, avg 7.1%
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911: full memory 3.0s, avg 6.7%
> 2021-12-01 13:16:46,911:
>
> So stall times with v5.15 and with the patch are vaguely similar with
> stall times for 5.16-rc1 being terrible
>
> Swap on
> -------
>
> Kernel: 5.15
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,392: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,392: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: some cpu 8.02 5.19 2.93
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: some io 77.30 61.75 37.00
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: full io 62.33 50.53 29.98
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: some memory 82.05 66.42 39.74
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: full memory 73.27 57.79 34.39
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: Stall times for the last 272.6s:
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: some cpu 13.7s, avg 5.0%
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: some io 167.4s, avg 61.4%
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,393: full io 135.0s, avg 49.5%
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,394: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,394: some memory 180.4s, avg 66.2%
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,394: full memory 155.9s, avg 57.2%
> 2021-12-01 13:23:04,394:
>
> Kernel: 5.16-rc1
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: some cpu 4.03 2.51 1.46
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: some io 61.02 38.02 25.97
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: full io 53.30 32.69 22.18
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: some memory 99.02 87.77 68.67
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,025: full memory 98.66 85.18 65.45
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: Stall times for the last 620.8s:
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: some cpu 11.9s, avg 1.9%
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: some io 182.9s, avg 29.5%
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: full io 156.0s, avg 25.1%
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: some memory 463.1s, avg 74.6%
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026: full memory 437.0s, avg 70.4%
> 2021-12-01 13:35:01,026:
>
> Kernel: 5.16-rc1-v3r4
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: Peak values: avg10 avg60 avg300
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: some cpu 6.45 3.62 2.21
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: some io 74.16 58.74 34.14
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: full io 62.77 48.21 27.97
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: ----------- ------ ------ ------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,066: some memory 78.82 62.85 36.39
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: full memory 71.42 55.12 31.92
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: Stall times for the last 257.2s:
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: some cpu 9.9s, avg 3.9%
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: some io 150.9s, avg 58.7%
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: full io 123.2s, avg 47.9%
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: -----------
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: some memory 161.5s, avg 62.8%
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067: full memory 141.6s, avg 55.1%
> 2021-12-01 13:42:43,067:
>
> Again 5.16-rc1 stuttered badly but the new patch was comparable to 5.15.
>
> As my baseline figures are very different to yours due to differences in
> storage, can you test the following please?
I don't know if this was directed at me, but I reran my swapfile
testcase on 5.16-rc3 and found that it had nearly the same runtime as it
did in 5.15.
--D
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> index 58e744b78c2c..936dc0b6c226 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> @@ -277,6 +277,7 @@ enum vmscan_throttle_state {
> VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK,
> VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED,
> VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS,
> + VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED,
> NR_VMSCAN_THROTTLE,
> };
>
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> index f25a6149d3ba..ca2e9009a651 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> @@ -30,12 +30,14 @@
> #define _VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK (1 << VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK)
> #define _VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED (1 << VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED)
> #define _VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS (1 << VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS)
> +#define _VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED (1 << VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED)
>
> #define show_throttle_flags(flags) \
> (flags) ? __print_flags(flags, "|", \
> {_VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK, "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK"}, \
> {_VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED, "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED"}, \
> - {_VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS, "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS"} \
> + {_VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS, "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS"}, \
> + {_VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED, "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED"} \
> ) : "VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NONE"
>
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index fb9584641ac7..e3f2dd1e8cd9 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1021,6 +1021,39 @@ static void handle_write_error(struct address_space *mapping,
> unlock_page(page);
> }
>
> +bool skip_throttle_noprogress(pg_data_t *pgdat)
> +{
> + int reclaimable = 0, write_pending = 0;
> + int i;
> +
> + /*
> + * If kswapd is disabled, reschedule if necessary but do not
> + * throttle as the system is likely near OOM.
> + */
> + if (pgdat->kswapd_failures >= MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
> + return true;
> +
> + /*
> + * If there are a lot of dirty/writeback pages then do not
> + * throttle as throttling will occur when the pages cycle
> + * towards the end of the LRU if still under writeback.
> + */
> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_ZONES; i++) {
> + struct zone *zone = pgdat->node_zones + i;
> +
> + if (!populated_zone(zone))
> + continue;
> +
> + reclaimable += zone_reclaimable_pages(zone);
> + write_pending += zone_page_state_snapshot(zone,
> + NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING);
> + }
> + if (2 * write_pending <= reclaimable)
> + return true;
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> void reclaim_throttle(pg_data_t *pgdat, enum vmscan_throttle_state reason)
> {
> wait_queue_head_t *wqh = &pgdat->reclaim_wait[reason];
> @@ -1056,8 +1089,16 @@ void reclaim_throttle(pg_data_t *pgdat, enum vmscan_throttle_state reason)
> }
>
> break;
> + case VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED:
> + fallthrough;
> case VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS:
> - timeout = HZ/2;
> + if (skip_throttle_noprogress(pgdat)) {
> + cond_resched();
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + timeout = 1;
> +
> break;
> case VMSCAN_THROTTLE_ISOLATED:
> timeout = HZ/50;
> @@ -3321,7 +3362,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> if (!current_is_kswapd() && current_may_throttle() &&
> !sc->hibernation_mode &&
> test_bit(LRUVEC_CONGESTED, &target_lruvec->flags))
> - reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK);
> + reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_CONGESTED);
>
> if (should_continue_reclaim(pgdat, sc->nr_reclaimed - nr_reclaimed,
> sc))
> @@ -3386,16 +3427,16 @@ static void consider_reclaim_throttle(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> }
>
> /*
> - * Do not throttle kswapd on NOPROGRESS as it will throttle on
> - * VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK if there are too many pages under
> - * writeback and marked for immediate reclaim at the tail of
> - * the LRU.
> + * Do not throttle kswapd or cgroup reclaim on NOPROGRESS as it will
> + * throttle on VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK if there are too many pages
> + * under writeback and marked for immediate reclaim at the tail of the
> + * LRU.
> */
> - if (current_is_kswapd())
> + if (current_is_kswapd() || cgroup_reclaim(sc))
> return;
>
> /* Throttle if making no progress at high prioities. */
> - if (sc->priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
> + if (sc->priority == 1 && !sc->nr_reclaimed)
> reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS);
> }
>
> @@ -3415,6 +3456,7 @@ static void shrink_zones(struct zonelist *zonelist, struct scan_control *sc)
> unsigned long nr_soft_scanned;
> gfp_t orig_mask;
> pg_data_t *last_pgdat = NULL;
> + pg_data_t *first_pgdat = NULL;
>
> /*
> * If the number of buffer_heads in the machine exceeds the maximum
> @@ -3478,14 +3520,18 @@ static void shrink_zones(struct zonelist *zonelist, struct scan_control *sc)
> /* need some check for avoid more shrink_zone() */
> }
>
> + if (!first_pgdat)
> + first_pgdat = zone->zone_pgdat;
> +
> /* See comment about same check for global reclaim above */
> if (zone->zone_pgdat == last_pgdat)
> continue;
> last_pgdat = zone->zone_pgdat;
> shrink_node(zone->zone_pgdat, sc);
> - consider_reclaim_throttle(zone->zone_pgdat, sc);
> }
>
> + consider_reclaim_throttle(first_pgdat, sc);
> +
> /*
> * Restore to original mask to avoid the impact on the caller if we
> * promoted it to __GFP_HIGHMEM.
>
> --
> Mel Gorman
> SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists