[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <3782D28E-B0F0-4CC7-98A6-27E443A92730@linux.dev>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 10:31:20 +0800
From: Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>
To: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
hannes@...xchg.org,
mhocko@...nel.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
shakeel.butt@...ux.dev,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
david@...morbit.com,
zhengqi.arch@...edance.com,
yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev,
nphamcs@...il.com,
chengming.zhou@...ux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
hamzamahfooz@...ux.microsoft.com,
apais@...ux.microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 27/28] mm: memcontrol: eliminate the problem of dying
memory cgroup for LRU folios
> On May 20, 2025, at 19:27, Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:45:31AM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
>> Pagecache pages are charged at allocation time and hold a reference
>> to the original memory cgroup until reclaimed. Depending on memory
>> pressure, page sharing patterns between different cgroups and cgroup
>> creation/destruction rates, many dying memory cgroups can be pinned
>> by pagecache pages, reducing page reclaim efficiency and wasting
>> memory. Converting LRU folios and most other raw memory cgroup pins
>> to the object cgroup direction can fix this long-living problem.
>>
>> Finally, folio->memcg_data of LRU folios and kmem folios will always
>> point to an object cgroup pointer. The folio->memcg_data of slab
>> folios will point to an vector of object cgroups.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 78 +++++--------
>> mm/huge_memory.c | 33 ++++++
>> mm/memcontrol-v1.c | 15 ++-
>> mm/memcontrol.c | 228 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 4 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 132 deletions(-)
>
> [...]
>
>> +static void lruvec_reparent_lru(struct lruvec *src, struct lruvec *dst,
>> + enum lru_list lru)
>> +{
>> + int zid;
>> + struct mem_cgroup_per_node *mz_src, *mz_dst;
>> +
>> + mz_src = container_of(src, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
>> + mz_dst = container_of(dst, struct mem_cgroup_per_node, lruvec);
>> +
>> + if (lru != LRU_UNEVICTABLE)
>> + list_splice_tail_init(&src->lists[lru], &dst->lists[lru]);
>> +
>> + for (zid = 0; zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) {
>> + mz_dst->lru_zone_size[zid][lru] += mz_src->lru_zone_size[zid][lru];
>> + mz_src->lru_zone_size[zid][lru] = 0;
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I think this function should also update memcg and lruvec stats of
> parent memcg? Or is it intentional?
Hi Harry,
No. Do not need. Because the statistics are accounted hierarchically.
Thanks.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Harry / Hyeonggon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists