[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87edi4jq19.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2023 13:58:10 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com>
Cc: tj@...nel.org, lizefan.x@...edance.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
corbet@....net, mhocko@...nel.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
shakeelb@...gle.com, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, yosryahmed@...gle.com,
willy@...radead.org, linmiaohe@...wei.com,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, laoar.shao@...il.com,
yuzhao@...gle.com, wuyun.abel@...edance.com, david@...hat.com,
peterx@...hat.com, vishal.moola@...il.com, hughd@...gle.com,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, jianlv@...y.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: add interface to force disable swap
Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 4:26 PM Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 9:17 AM Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > From: Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com>
>> >> >
>> >> > Global reclaim will swap even if swappiness is set to 0.
>> >>
>> >> Why? Can you elaborate the situation?
>> >
>> > We reproduced the issue of pages being swapped out even when swappiness is
>> > set to 0 in the production environment through the following test program.
>> > Not sure whether this program can reproduce the issue in any environment.
>> >
>> > From the implementation of the get_scan_count code, it can be seen that,
>> > based on the current runtime situation, memory reclamation will choose a
>> > scanning method (SCAN_ANON/SCAN_FILE/SCAN_FRACT) to determine how
>> > aggressively the anon and file LRU are scanned. However, this introduces
>> > uncertainty.
>> >
>> > For the JVM issue at hand, we expect deterministic SCAN_FILE scan to avoid
>> > swapping out anon pages.
>>
>> Why doesn't memory.swap.max work?
>
> The main reason is that deployed nodes are kept on cgroups v1.
Check the code again. IIUC, for swappiness == 0, anonymous pages will
only be reclaimed if sc->file_is_tiny is true. If we don't swap in that
situation, OOM may be triggerred. I don't think that it's a good idea
to do that. Or I miss something?
--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Powered by blists - more mailing lists