From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jia He <hejianet@gmail.com>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix condition for throttle_direct_reclaim
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:02:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170313090206.GC31518@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170310194620.5021-1-shakeelb@google.com>
On Fri 10-03-17 11:46:20, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Recently kswapd has been modified to give up after MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES
> number of unsucessful iterations. Before going to sleep, kswapd thread
> will unconditionally wakeup all threads sleeping on pfmemalloc_wait.
> However the awoken threads will recheck the watermarks and wake the
> kswapd thread and sleep again on pfmemalloc_wait. There is a chance
> of continuous back and forth between kswapd and direct reclaiming
> threads if the kswapd keep failing and thus defeat the purpose of
> adding backoff mechanism to kswapd. So, add kswapd_failures check
> on the throttle_direct_reclaim condition.
I have to say I really do not like this. kswapd_failures shouldn't
really be checked outside of the kswapd context. The
pfmemalloc_watermark_ok/throttle_direct_reclaim is quite complex even
without putting another variable into it. I wish we rather replace this
throttling by something else. Johannes had an idea to throttle by the
number of reclaimers.
Anyway, I am wondering whether we can hit this issue in
practice? Have you seen it happening or is this a result of the code
review? I would assume that that !zone_reclaimable_pages check in
pfmemalloc_watermark_ok should help to some degree.
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 12 +++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index bae698484e8e..b2d24cc7a161 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2819,6 +2819,12 @@ static bool pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pg_data_t *pgdat)
> return wmark_ok;
> }
>
> +static bool should_throttle_direct_reclaim(pg_data_t *pgdat)
> +{
> + return (pgdat->kswapd_failures < MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES &&
> + !pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat));
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Throttle direct reclaimers if backing storage is backed by the network
> * and the PFMEMALLOC reserve for the preferred node is getting dangerously
> @@ -2873,7 +2879,7 @@ static bool throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct zonelist *zonelist,
>
> /* Throttle based on the first usable node */
> pgdat = zone->zone_pgdat;
> - if (pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat))
> + if (!should_throttle_direct_reclaim(pgdat))
> goto out;
> break;
> }
> @@ -2895,14 +2901,14 @@ static bool throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> */
> if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS)) {
> wait_event_interruptible_timeout(pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait,
> - pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat), HZ);
> + !should_throttle_direct_reclaim(pgdat), HZ);
>
> goto check_pending;
> }
>
> /* Throttle until kswapd wakes the process */
> wait_event_killable(zone->zone_pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait,
> - pfmemalloc_watermark_ok(pgdat));
> + !should_throttle_direct_reclaim(pgdat));
>
> check_pending:
> if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> --
> 2.12.0.246.ga2ecc84866-goog
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2017-03-13 9:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-10 19:46 Shakeel Butt
2017-03-13 9:02 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-03-13 15:07 ` Shakeel Butt
2017-03-13 15:46 ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-13 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2017-03-13 19:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-13 21:48 ` Shakeel Butt
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=20170313090206.GC31518@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hejianet@gmail.com \
--cc=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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