From: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Zhu Yanhai <zhu.yanhai@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] memcg: add the soft_limit reclaim in global direct reclaim
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:37:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1304030226-19332-1-git-send-email-yinghan@google.com> (raw)
We recently added the change in global background reclaim which counts the
return value of soft_limit reclaim. Now this patch adds the similar logic
on global direct reclaim.
We should skip scanning global LRU on shrink_zone if soft_limit reclaim does
enough work. This is the first step where we start with counting the nr_scanned
and nr_reclaimed from soft_limit reclaim into global scan_control.
The patch is based on mmotm-04-14 and i triggered kernel BUG at mm/vmscan.c:1058!
[ 938.242033] kernel BUG at mm/vmscan.c:1058!
[ 938.242033] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMPA.
[ 938.242033] last sysfs file: /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1f.2/device
[ 938.242033] Pid: 546, comm: kswapd0 Tainted: G W 2.6.39-smp-direct_reclaim
[ 938.242033] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff810ed174>] [<ffffffff810ed174>] isolate_pages_global+0x18c/0x34f
[ 938.242033] RSP: 0018:ffff88082f83bb50 EFLAGS: 00010082
[ 938.242033] RAX: 00000000ffffffea RBX: ffff88082f83bc90 RCX: 0000000000000401
[ 938.242033] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffffea001ca653e8
[ 938.242033] RBP: ffff88082f83bc20 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffff88085ffb6e00
[ 938.242033] R10: ffff88085ffb73d0 R11: ffff88085ffb6e00 R12: ffff88085ffb6e00
[ 938.242033] R13: ffffea001ca65410 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffffea001ca653e8
[ 938.242033] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88085fd00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 938.242033] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b
[ 938.242033] CR2: 00007f5c3405c320 CR3: 0000000001803000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
[ 938.242033] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 938.242033] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 938.242033] Process kswapd0 (pid: 546, threadinfo ffff88082f83a000, task ffff88082fe52080)
[ 938.242033] Stack:
[ 938.242033] ffff88085ffb6e00 ffffea0000000002 0000000000000021 0000000000000000
[ 938.242033] 0000000000000000 ffff88082f83bcb8 ffffea00108eec80 ffffea00108eecb8
[ 938.242033] ffffea00108eecf0 0000000000000004 fffffffffffffffc 0000000000000020
[ 938.242033] Call Trace:
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810ee8a5>] shrink_inactive_list+0x185/0x418
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810366cc>] ? __switch_to+0xea/0x212
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810e8b35>] ? determine_dirtyable_memory+0x1a/0x2c
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810ef19b>] shrink_zone+0x380/0x44d
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810e5188>] ? zone_watermark_ok_safe+0xa1/0xae
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810efbd8>] kswapd+0x41b/0x76b
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810ef7bd>] ? zone_reclaim+0x2fb/0x2fb
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff81088569>] kthread+0x82/0x8a
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff8141b0d4>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff810884e7>] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x112/0x112
[ 938.242033] [<ffffffff8141b0d0>] ? gs_change+0xb/0xb
Thank you Minchan for the pointer. I reverted the following commit and I
haven't seen the problem with the same operation. I haven't looked deeply
on the patch yet, but figured it would be a good idea to post the dump.
The dump looks not directly related to this patchset, but ppl can use it to
reproduce the problem.
commit 278df9f451dc71dcd002246be48358a473504ad0
Author: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Mar 22 16:32:54 2011 -0700
mm: reclaim invalidated page ASAP
How to reproduce it, On my 32G of machine
1. I create two memcgs and set their hard_limit and soft_limit:
$echo 20g >A/memory.limit_in_bytes
$echo 20g >B/memory.limit_in_bytes
$echo 3g >A/memory.soft_limit_in_bytes
$echo 3g >B/memory.soft_limit_in_bytes
2. Reading a 20g file on each container
$echo $$ >A/tasks
$cat /export/hdc3/dd_A/tf0 > /dev/zero
$echo $$ >B/tasks
$cat /export/hdc3/dd_B/tf0 > /dev/zero
3. Add memory pressure by allocating anon + mlock. And trigger global
reclaim.
Ying Han (2):
Add the soft_limit reclaim in global direct reclaim.
Add stats to monitor soft_limit reclaim
Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt | 10 ++++-
mm/memcontrol.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
mm/vmscan.c | 16 ++++++++-
3 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
--
1.7.3.1
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-28 22:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 22:37 Ying Han [this message]
2011-04-28 22:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add " Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:25 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:26 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 17:42 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 13:05 ` Michal Hocko
2011-04-29 17:44 ` Ying Han
2011-05-02 7:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-04-28 22:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] Add stats to monitor soft_limit reclaim Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:26 ` Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:51 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2011-04-29 3:28 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:30 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 19:12 ` Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:24 ` [PATCH 0/2] memcg: add the soft_limit reclaim in global direct reclaim Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:23 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 17:17 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 16:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-04-29 17:19 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 17:48 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 18:58 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 23:20 ` Minchan Kim
2011-04-29 23:41 ` Ying Han
2011-04-30 1:33 ` Ying Han
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=1304030226-19332-1-git-send-email-yinghan@google.com \
--to=yinghan@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=zhu.yanhai@gmail.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