From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: "Bruno Prémont" <bonbons@linux-vserver.org>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Subject: Re: Memory CG and 5.1 to 5.6 uprade slows backup
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 11:46:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200409094615.GE18386@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200409112505.2e1fc150@hemera.lan.sysophe.eu>
[Cc Chris]
On Thu 09-04-20 11:25:05, Bruno Prémont wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Upgrading from 5.1 kernel to 5.6 kernel on a production system using
> cgroups (v2) and having backup process in a memory.high=2G cgroup
> sees backup being highly throttled (there are about 1.5T to be
> backuped).
What does /proc/sys/vm/dirty_* say? Is it possible that the reclaim is
not making progress on too many dirty pages and that triggers the back
off mechanism that has been implemented recently in 5.4 (have a look at
0e4b01df8659 ("mm, memcg: throttle allocators when failing reclaim over
memory.high") and e26733e0d0ec ("mm, memcg: throttle allocators based on
ancestral memory.high").
Keeping the rest of the email for reference.
> Most memory usage in that cgroup is for file cache.
>
> Here are the memory details for the cgroup:
> memory.current:2147225600
> memory.events:low 0
> memory.events:high 423774
> memory.events:max 31131
> memory.events:oom 0
> memory.events:oom_kill 0
> memory.events.local:low 0
> memory.events.local:high 423774
> memory.events.local:max 31131
> memory.events.local:oom 0
> memory.events.local:oom_kill 0
> memory.high:2147483648
> memory.low:33554432
> memory.max:2415919104
> memory.min:0
> memory.oom.group:0
> memory.pressure:some avg10=90.42 avg60=72.59 avg300=78.30 total=298252577711
> memory.pressure:full avg10=90.32 avg60=72.53 avg300=78.24 total=295658626500
> memory.stat:anon 10887168
> memory.stat:file 2062102528
> memory.stat:kernel_stack 73728
> memory.stat:slab 76148736
> memory.stat:sock 360448
> memory.stat:shmem 0
> memory.stat:file_mapped 12029952
> memory.stat:file_dirty 946176
> memory.stat:file_writeback 405504
> memory.stat:anon_thp 0
> memory.stat:inactive_anon 0
> memory.stat:active_anon 10121216
> memory.stat:inactive_file 1954959360
> memory.stat:active_file 106418176
> memory.stat:unevictable 0
> memory.stat:slab_reclaimable 75247616
> memory.stat:slab_unreclaimable 901120
> memory.stat:pgfault 8651676
> memory.stat:pgmajfault 2013
> memory.stat:workingset_refault 8670651
> memory.stat:workingset_activate 409200
> memory.stat:workingset_nodereclaim 62040
> memory.stat:pgrefill 1513537
> memory.stat:pgscan 47519855
> memory.stat:pgsteal 44933838
> memory.stat:pgactivate 7986
> memory.stat:pgdeactivate 1480623
> memory.stat:pglazyfree 0
> memory.stat:pglazyfreed 0
> memory.stat:thp_fault_alloc 0
> memory.stat:thp_collapse_alloc 0
>
> Numbers that change most are pgscan/pgsteal
> Regularly the backup process seems to be blocked for about 2s, but not
> within a syscall according to strace.
>
> Is there a way to tell kernel that this cgroup should not be throttled
> and its inactive file cache given up (rather quickly).
>
> The aim here is to avoid backup from killing production task file cache
> but not starving it.
>
>
> If there is some useful info missing, please tell (eventually adding how
> I can obtain it).
>
>
> On a side note, I liked v1's mode of soft/hard memory limit where the
> memory amount between soft and hard could be used if system has enough
> free memory. For v2 the difference between high and max seems almost of
> no use.
>
> A cgroup parameter for impacting RO file cache differently than
> anonymous memory or otherwise dirty memory would be great too.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Bruno
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-09 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-09 9:25 Bruno Prémont
2020-04-09 9:46 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2020-04-09 10:17 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-09 10:34 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-09 15:09 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-09 15:24 ` Chris Down
2020-04-09 15:40 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-09 17:50 ` Chris Down
2020-04-09 17:56 ` Chris Down
2020-04-09 15:25 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-10 7:15 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-10 8:43 ` Bruno Prémont
[not found] ` <20200410115010.1d9f6a3f@hemera.lan.sysophe.eu>
[not found] ` <20200414163134.GQ4629@dhcp22.suse.cz>
2020-04-15 10:17 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-15 10:24 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-15 11:37 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-14 15:09 ` Bruno Prémont
2020-04-09 10:50 ` Chris Down
2020-04-09 11:58 ` Bruno Prémont
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=20200409094615.GE18386@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=bonbons@linux-vserver.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@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