linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmscan: Add retry logic for cgroups with memory.low in kswapd

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: <aQ3yhmsT2NHeNwLi@tiehlicka>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:22:14 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@...ux.dev>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
	Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@...gle.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
	Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmscan: Add retry logic for cgroups with
 memory.low in kswapd

Sorry for late reply.

On Mon 20-10-25 10:11:23, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
[...]
> To provide more context about our specific setup:
> 
> 1. The memory.low values set on host pods are actually quite large,
>    some pods are set to 10GB, others to 20GB, etc.
> 2. Since most pods have memory limits configured, each time kswapd
>    is woken up, if a pod's memory usage hasn't exceeded its own
>    memory.low, its memory won't be reclaimed.
> 3. When applications start up, rapidly consume memory, or experience
>    network traffic bursts, the kernel reaches steal_suitable_fallback(),
>    which sets watermark_boost and subsequently wakes kswapd.
> 4. In the core logic of kswapd thread (balance_pgdat()), when reclaim is
>    triggered by watermark_boost, the maximum priority is 10. Higher priority
>    values mean less aggressive LRU scanning, which can result in no pages
>    being reclaimed during a single scan cycle:
> 
> if (nr_boost_reclaim && sc.priority == DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
>     raise_priority = false;
> 
> 5. This eventually causes pgdat->kswapd_failures to continuously accumulate,
>    exceeding MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES, and consequently kswapd stops working.
>    At this point, the system's available memory is still significantly above
>    the high watermark—it's inappropriate for kswapd to stop under these
>    conditions.
> 
> The final observable issue is that a brief period of rapid memory allocation
> causes kswapd to stop running, ultimately triggering direct reclaim and
> making the applications unresponsive.

This to me sounds like something to be addressed in the watermark
boosting code. I do not think we should be breaching low limit for that
(opportunistic) reclaim.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs