linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	kernel-team@lge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: scan pages until it founds eligible pages
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 16:03:11 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510070311.GA24772@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170510061312.GB26158@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 08:13:12AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 10-05-17 10:46:54, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:00:44AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > @@ -1486,6 +1486,12 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > >  			continue;
> > >  		}
> > >  
> > > +		/*
> > > +		 * Do not count skipped pages because we do want to isolate
> > > +		 * some pages even when the LRU mostly contains ineligible
> > > +		 * pages
> > > +		 */
> > 
> > How about adding comment about "why"?
> > 
> > /*
> >  * Do not count skipped pages because it makes the function to return with
> >  * none isolated pages if the LRU mostly contains inelgible pages so that
> >  * VM cannot reclaim any pages and trigger premature OOM.
> >  */
> 
> I am not sure this is necessarily any better. Mentioning a pre-mature
> OOM would require a much better explanation because a first immediate
> question would be "why don't we scan those pages at priority 0". Also
> decision about the OOM is at a different layer and it might change in
> future when this doesn't apply any more. But it is not like I would
> insist...
> 
> > > +		scan++;
> > >  		switch (__isolate_lru_page(page, mode)) {
> > >  		case 0:
> > >  			nr_pages = hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > 
> > Confirmed.
> 
> Hmm. I can clearly see how we could skip over too many pages and hit
> small reclaim priorities too quickly but I am still scratching my head
> about how we could hit the OOM killer as a result. The amount of pages
> on the active anonymous list suggests that we are not able to rotate
> pages quickly enough. I have to keep thinking about that.

I explained it but seems to be not enouggh. Let me try again.

The problem is that get_scan_count determines nr_to_scan with
eligible zones.

        size = lruvec_lru_size(lruvec, lru, sc->reclaim_idx);
        size = size >> sc->priority;

Assumes sc->priority is 0 and LRU list is as follows.

        N-N-N-N-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H-H

(Ie, small eligible pages are in the head of LRU but others are
almost ineligible pages)

In that case, size becomes 4 so VM want to scan 4 pages but 4 pages
from tail of the LRU are not eligible pages.
If get_scan_count counts skipped pages, it doesn't reclaim remained
pages after scanning 4 pages.

If it's more helpful to understand the problem, I will add it to
the description.

--
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:[~2017-05-10  7:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1493700038-27091-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org>
2017-05-02  5:14 ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-02  7:54   ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-02 14:51     ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-02 15:14       ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-03  4:48         ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-03  6:00           ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-10  1:46             ` Minchan Kim
2017-05-10  6:13               ` Michal Hocko
2017-05-10  7:03                 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2017-05-10  7:22                   ` Michal Hocko

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=20170510070311.GA24772@bbox \
    --to=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    /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