linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	yanmin.zhang@intel.com, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	linuxram@us.ibm.com
Cc: linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] [RFC] Functional fix to zone_reclaim() and bring behaviour more in line with expectations V2
Date: Tue,  9 Jun 2009 18:01:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1244566904-31470-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> (raw)

Changelog since V1
  o Rebase to mmotm
  o Add various acks
  o Documentation and patch leader fixes
  o Use Kosaki's method for calculating the number of unmapped pages
  o Consider the zone full in more situations than all pages being unreclaimable
  o Add a counter to detect when scan-avoidance heuristics are failing
  o Handle jiffie wraps for zone_reclaim_interval
  o Move zone_reclaim_interval to the end of the set with the view to dropping
    it. If Kosaki's calculation is accurate, then the problem being dealt with
    should also be addressed

A bug was brought to my attention against a distro kernel but it affects
mainline and I believe problems like this have been reported in various guises
on the mailing lists although I don't have specific examples at the moment.

The problem is that malloc() stalled for a long time (minutes in some
cases) if a large tmpfs mount was occupying a large percentage of memory
overall. The pages did not get cleaned or reclaimed by zone_reclaim()
because the zone_reclaim_mode was unsuitable, but the lists are uselessly
scanned frequencly making the CPU spin at near 100%.

This patchset intends to address that bug and bring the behaviour of
zone_reclaim() more in line with expectations. It is based on top of mmotm
and takes advantage of Kosaki's work with respect to zone_reclaim().

Patch 1 alters the heuristics that zone_reclaim() uses to determine if the
	scan should go ahead. Currently, it is basically assuming
	zone_reclaim_mode is 1 and historically it could not deal with
	tmpfs pages at all. This fixes up the heuristic so that the scan
	is more likely to be correctly avoided.

Patch 2 notes that zone_reclaim() returning a failure automatically means
	the zone is marked full. This is not always true. It could have
	failed because the GFP mask or zone_reclaim_mode were unsuitable.

Patch 3 introduces a counter zreclaim_failed that will increment each
	time the zone_reclaim scan-avoidance heuristics fail. If that
	counter is rapidly increasing, then zone_reclaim_mode should be
	set to 0 as a temporarily resolution and a bug reported.

Patch 4 reintroduces zone_reclaim_interval to catch the situation where
	zone_reclaim() cannot tell in advance that the scan is a waste of
	time. This is a brute force catch-all. I've asked the bug reporter
	to test with just patch 1. If that works, then this patch will be
	dropped and patch 3 will be enough to tell us if/when the situation
	occured again. Even with this patch applied, the counter will
	increase slowly so it's still possible to detect the problem.

 Documentation/sysctl/vm.txt |   15 +++++++
 include/linux/mmzone.h      |    9 ++++
 include/linux/swap.h        |    1 +
 include/linux/vmstat.h      |    3 +
 kernel/sysctl.c             |    9 ++++
 mm/internal.h               |    4 ++
 mm/page_alloc.c             |   26 ++++++++++--
 mm/vmscan.c                 |   91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 mm/vmstat.c                 |    3 +
 9 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

             reply	other threads:[~2009-06-09 16:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-09 17:01 Mel Gorman [this message]
2009-06-09 17:01 ` [PATCH 1/4] Properly account for the number of page cache pages zone_reclaim() can reclaim Mel Gorman
2009-06-09 18:15   ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-10  1:19   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-10  7:31     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-10 10:31     ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-10 11:59       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-10 13:41         ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-10 22:42           ` Ram Pai
2009-06-11 13:52             ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-11  1:29           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-11  3:26         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-09 17:01 ` [PATCH 2/4] Do not unconditionally treat zones that fail zone_reclaim() as full Mel Gorman
2009-06-09 18:11   ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-10  1:52   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-09 17:01 ` [PATCH 3/4] Count the number of times zone_reclaim() scans and fails Mel Gorman
2009-06-09 18:56   ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-10  1:47   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-10 10:36     ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-10  2:10   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-06-10 10:40     ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-09 17:01 ` [PATCH 4/4] Reintroduce zone_reclaim_interval for when zone_reclaim() scans and fails to avoid CPU spinning at 100% on NUMA Mel Gorman
2009-06-10  1:53   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-10  5:54   ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-10 10:48     ` Mel Gorman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1244566904-31470-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=yanmin.zhang@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox