From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: "T.J. Mercier" <tjmercier@google.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Efly Young <yangyifei03@kuaishou.com>,
android-mm@google.com, yuzhao@google.com,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcg: Use larger chunks for proactive reclaim
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 12:50:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240131175059.GC1227330@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240131162442.3487473-1-tjmercier@google.com>
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 04:24:41PM +0000, T.J. Mercier wrote:
> Before 388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive
> reclaim") we passed the number of pages for the reclaim request directly
> to try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages, which could lead to significant
> overreclaim in order to achieve fairness. After 0388536ac291 the number
> of pages was limited to a maxmimum of 32 (SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX) to reduce
> the amount of overreclaim. However such a small chunk size caused a
> regression in reclaim performance due to many more reclaim start/stop
> cycles inside memory_reclaim.
>
> Instead of limiting reclaim chunk size to the SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX constant,
> adjust the chunk size proportionally with number of pages left to
> reclaim. This allows for higher reclaim efficiency with large chunk
> sizes during the beginning of memory_reclaim, and reduces the amount of
> potential overreclaim by using small chunk sizes as the total reclaim
> amount is approached. Using 1/4 of the amount left to reclaim as the
> chunk size gives a good compromise between reclaim performance and
> overreclaim:
>
> root - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec)
> pre-0388536ac291 : 68047 10.46
> post-0388536ac291 : 13742 inf
> (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 67352 10.51
>
> /uid_0 - 1G reclaim pages/sec time (sec) overreclaim (MiB)
> pre-0388536ac291 : 258822 1.12 107.8
> post-0388536ac291 : 105174 2.49 3.5
> (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 233396 1.12 -7.4
>
> /uid_0 - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec)
> pre-0388536ac291 : 72334 7.09
> post-0388536ac291 : 38105 14.45
> (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 72914 6.96
>
> Fixes: 0388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive reclaim")
> Signed-off-by: T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@google.com>
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 46d8d02114cf..d68fb89eadd2 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -6977,7 +6977,8 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
> lru_add_drain_all();
>
> reclaimed = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(memcg,
> - min(nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX),
> + max((nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed) / 4,
> + (nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed) % 4),
I don't see why the % 4 is needed. It only kicks in when the delta
drops below 4, but try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages() already has
.nr_to_reclaim = max(nr_pages, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX),
so it looks like dead code.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-31 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-31 16:24 T.J. Mercier
2024-01-31 17:50 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2024-01-31 18:01 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-01-31 20:12 ` Johannes Weiner
2024-02-01 13:57 ` Michal Koutný
2024-02-01 15:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2024-02-01 18:10 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-02-02 5:02 ` Efly Young
2024-02-02 10:15 ` Michal Koutný
2024-02-02 18:22 ` T.J. Mercier
2024-02-02 19:46 ` Michal Koutný
2024-02-02 21:42 ` T.J. Mercier
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=20240131175059.GC1227330@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=android-mm@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=tjmercier@google.com \
--cc=yangyifei03@kuaishou.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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