From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]vmscan: handle underflow for get_scan_ratio
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 18:13:04 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100402180812.646D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100401151639.a030fb10.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Yeah, I don't want ignore .33-stable too. if I can't find the root cause
> > in 2-3 days, I'll revert guilty patch anyway.
> >
>
> It's a good idea to avoid fixing a bug one-way-in-stable,
> other-way-in-mainline. Because then we have new code in both trees
> which is different. And the -stable guys sensibly like to see code get
> a bit of a shakedown in mainline before backporting it.
>
> So it would be better to merge the "simple" patch into mainline, tagged
> for -stable backporting. Then we can later implement the larger fix in
> mainline, perhaps starting by reverting the "simple" fix.
.....ok. I don't have to prevent your code maintainship. although I still
think we need to fix the issue completely.
===================================================================
From 52358cbccdfe94e0381974cd6e937bcc6b1c608b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 17:13:48 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "vmscan: get_scan_ratio() cleanup"
Shaohua Li reported his tmpfs streaming I/O test can lead to make oom.
The test uses a 6G tmpfs in a system with 3G memory. In the tmpfs,
there are 6 copies of kernel source and the test does kbuild for each
copy. His investigation shows the test has a lot of rotated anon
pages and quite few file pages, so get_scan_ratio calculates percent[0]
(i.e. scanning percent for anon) to be zero. Actually the percent[0]
shoule be a big value, but our calculation round it to zero.
Although before commit 84b18490, we have the same sick too. but the old
logic can rescue percent[0]==0 case only when priority==0. It had hided
the real issue. I didn't think merely streaming io can makes percent[0]==0
&& priority==0 situation. but I was wrong.
So, definitely we have to fix such tmpfs streaming io issue. but anyway
I revert the regression commit at first.
This reverts commit 84b18490d1f1bc7ed5095c929f78bc002eb70f26.
Reported-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 23 +++++++++--------------
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 79c8098..cb3947e 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1535,13 +1535,6 @@ static void get_scan_ratio(struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc,
unsigned long ap, fp;
struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
- /* If we have no swap space, do not bother scanning anon pages. */
- if (!sc->may_swap || (nr_swap_pages <= 0)) {
- percent[0] = 0;
- percent[1] = 100;
- return;
- }
-
anon = zone_nr_lru_pages(zone, sc, LRU_ACTIVE_ANON) +
zone_nr_lru_pages(zone, sc, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON);
file = zone_nr_lru_pages(zone, sc, LRU_ACTIVE_FILE) +
@@ -1639,20 +1632,22 @@ static void shrink_zone(int priority, struct zone *zone,
unsigned long nr_reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
unsigned long nr_to_reclaim = sc->nr_to_reclaim;
struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
+ int noswap = 0;
- get_scan_ratio(zone, sc, percent);
+ /* If we have no swap space, do not bother scanning anon pages. */
+ if (!sc->may_swap || (nr_swap_pages <= 0)) {
+ noswap = 1;
+ percent[0] = 0;
+ percent[1] = 100;
+ } else
+ get_scan_ratio(zone, sc, percent);
for_each_evictable_lru(l) {
int file = is_file_lru(l);
unsigned long scan;
- if (percent[file] == 0) {
- nr[l] = 0;
- continue;
- }
-
scan = zone_nr_lru_pages(zone, sc, l);
- if (priority) {
+ if (priority || noswap) {
scan >>= priority;
scan = (scan * percent[file]) / 100;
}
--
1.6.5.2
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-02 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-30 5:53 Shaohua Li
2010-03-30 6:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-30 6:32 ` Shaohua Li
2010-03-30 6:40 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-30 6:53 ` Shaohua Li
2010-03-30 7:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-30 8:13 ` Shaohua Li
2010-03-31 4:53 ` Shaohua Li
2010-03-31 5:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-31 5:51 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-31 6:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-31 6:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-01 22:16 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-02 9:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2010-04-06 1:22 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 3:36 ` Rik van Riel
2010-03-31 5:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-02 6:50 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-02 9:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-02 9:24 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-04 14:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-06 1:25 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-06 1:36 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-06 1:50 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 2:06 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-06 2:30 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 2:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-06 3:31 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 3:40 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-06 4:49 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 5:09 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-04 0:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 1:27 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-06 5:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-04-06 5:36 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-09 6:51 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-09 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-09 21:25 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-13 1:30 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-13 2:42 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-13 7:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-13 8:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-14 1:27 ` Shaohua Li
2010-04-15 3:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-12 1:57 ` Shaohua Li
2010-03-31 5:41 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-03-30 10:17 ` Minchan Kim
2010-03-30 10:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-03-30 11:56 ` Balbir Singh
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=20100402180812.646D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@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