[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <15056829.uLZWGnKmhe@natalenko.name>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 22:42:46 +0200
From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>, Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject:
Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] Unexpected OOM instead of reclaiming inactive file
pages
Hello.
On pondělí 11. srpna 2025 18:06:16, středoevropský letní čas David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2025, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
>
> > Hello Damien.
> >
> > I'm fairly confident that the following commit
> >
> > 459779d04ae8d block: Improve read ahead size for rotational devices
> >
> > caused a regression in my test bench.
> >
> > I'm running v6.17-rc1 in a small QEMU VM with virtio-scsi disk. It has got 1 GiB of RAM, so I can saturate it easily causing reclaiming mechanism to kick in.
> >
> > If MGLRU is enabled:
> >
> > $ echo 1000 | sudo tee /sys/kernel/mm/lru_gen/min_ttl_ms
> >
> > then, once page cache builds up, an OOM happens without reclaiming inactive file pages: [1]. Note that inactive_file:506952kB, I'd expect these to be reclaimed instead, like how it happens with v6.16.
> >
> > If MGLRU is disabled:
> >
> > $ echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/kernel/mm/lru_gen/min_ttl_ms
> >
> > then OOM doesn't occur, and things seem to work as usual.
> >
> > If MGLRU is enabled, and 459779d04ae8d is reverted on top of v6.17-rc1, the OOM doesn't happen either.
> >
> > Could you please check this?
> >
>
> This looks to be an MGLRU policy decision rather than a readahead
> regression, correct?
>
> Mem-Info:
> active_anon:388 inactive_anon:5382 isolated_anon:0
> active_file:9638 inactive_file:126738 isolated_file:0
>
> Setting min_ttl_ms to 1000 is preserving the working set and triggering
> the oom kill is the only alternative to free memory in that configuration.
> The oom kill is being triggered by kswapd for this purpose.
>
> So additional readahead would certainly increase that working set. This
> looks working as intended.
OK, this makes sense indeed, thanks for the explanation. But is inactive_file explosion expected and justified?
Without revert:
$ echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; free -m; sudo journalctl -kb >/dev/null; free -m
3
total used free shared buff/cache available
Mem: 690 179 536 3 57 510
Swap: 1379 12 1367
/* OOM happens here */
total used free shared buff/cache available
Mem: 690 177 52 3 561 513
Swap: 1379 17 1362
With revert:
$ echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches; free -m; sudo journalctl -kb >/dev/null; free -m
3
total used free shared buff/cache available
Mem: 690 214 498 4 64 476
Swap: 1379 0 1379
/* no OOM */
total used free shared buff/cache available
Mem: 690 209 462 4 119 481
Swap: 1379 0 1379
The journal folder size is:
$ sudo du -hs /var/log/journal
575M /var/log/journal
It looks like this readahead change causes far more data to be read than actually needed?
--
Oleksandr Natalenko, MSE
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists