linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10] mm: vmscan: try to reclaim swapcache pages if no swap space

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: <CAF8kJuO=Y6frTxMbR92XhzuC8Z8ALDWFLq2Mj3t0j+C9YXOaJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:30:23 -0800
From:   Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] mm: vmscan: try to reclaim swapcache pages if no swap space

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 5:00 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> > However, in swapcache_only mode, the scan count still increased when scan
> > non-swapcache pages because there are large number of non-swapcache pages
> > and rare swapcache pages in swapcache_only mode, and if the non-swapcache
> > is skipped and do not count, the scan of pages in isolate_lru_folios() can
> > eventually lead to hung task, just as Sachin reported [2].
>
> I find this paragraph really confusing! I guess what you meant to say is
> that a real swapcache_only is problematic because it can end up not
> making any progress, correct?
>
> AFAIU you have addressed that problem by making swapcache_only anon LRU
> specific, right? That would be certainly more robust as you can still
> reclaim from file LRUs. I cannot say I like that because swapcache_only
> is a bit confusing and I do not think we want to grow more special

That is my feeling as well. I don't like to have too many special
purposes modes either. It makes the whole process much harder to
reason. The comment seems to suggest it is not effective in some
situations. I am wondering if we can address that situation more
directly without the special mode. At the same time I am not very
familiar with the reclaim code path yet. I need to learn more about
this problem space to articulate my thoughts better . I can dig in
more, I might ask a lot of silly questions.

Chris

> purpose reclaim types. Would it be possible/reasonable to instead put
> swapcache pages on the file LRU instead?
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
>