From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, axelrasmussen@google.com,
yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, david@kernel.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
vbabka@suse.cz, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com,
mhocko@suse.com, corbet@lwn.net, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev,
zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, lujialin4@huawei.com,
zhongjinji@honor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 3/5] mm/mglru: extend shrink_one for both lrugen and non-lrugen
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 16:13:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251215211357.GF905277@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251209012557.1949239-4-chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
On Tue, Dec 09, 2025 at 01:25:55AM +0000, Chen Ridong wrote:
> From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
>
> Currently, flush_reclaim_state is placed differently between
> shrink_node_memcgs and shrink_many. shrink_many (only used for gen-LRU)
> calls it after each lruvec is shrunk, while shrink_node_memcgs calls it
> only after all lruvecs have been shrunk.
>
> This patch moves flush_reclaim_state into shrink_node_memcgs and calls it
> after each lruvec. This unifies the behavior and is reasonable because:
>
> 1. flush_reclaim_state adds current->reclaim_state->reclaimed to
> sc->nr_reclaimed.
> 2. For non-MGLRU root reclaim, this can help stop the iteration earlier
> when nr_to_reclaim is reached.
> 3. For non-root reclaim, the effect is negligible since flush_reclaim_state
> does nothing in that case.
>
> After moving flush_reclaim_state into shrink_node_memcgs, shrink_one can be
> extended to support both lrugen and non-lrugen paths. It will call
> try_to_shrink_lruvec for lrugen root reclaim and shrink_lruvec otherwise.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huawei.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 584f41eb4c14..795f5ebd9341 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -4758,23 +4758,7 @@ static bool try_to_shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> return nr_to_scan < 0;
> }
>
> -static void shrink_one(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> -{
> - unsigned long scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
> - unsigned long reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
> - struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> - struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
> -
> - try_to_shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc);
> -
> - shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, memcg, sc->priority);
> -
> - if (!sc->proactive)
> - vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false, sc->nr_scanned - scanned,
> - sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed);
> -
> - flush_reclaim_state(sc);
> -}
> +static void shrink_one(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc);
>
> static void shrink_many(struct pglist_data *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> {
> @@ -5760,6 +5744,27 @@ static inline bool should_continue_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> return inactive_lru_pages > pages_for_compaction;
> }
>
> +static void shrink_one(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
> +{
> + unsigned long scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
> + unsigned long reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
> + struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
> +
> + if (lru_gen_enabled() && root_reclaim(sc))
> + try_to_shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc);
> + else
> + shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc);
Yikes. So we end up with:
shrink_node_memcgs()
shrink_one()
if lru_gen_enabled && root_reclaim(sc)
try_to_shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc)
else
shrink_lruvec()
if lru_gen_enabled && !root_reclaim(sc)
lru_gen_shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc)
try_to_shrink_lruvec()
I think it's doing too much at once. Can you get it into the following
shape:
shrink_node_memcgs()
for each memcg:
if lru_gen_enabled:
lru_gen_shrink_lruvec()
else
shrink_lruvec()
and handle the differences in those two functions? Then look for
overlap one level down, and so forth.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-15 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-09 1:25 [PATCH -next 0/5] mm/mglru: remove memcg lru Chen Ridong
2025-12-09 1:25 ` [PATCH -next 1/5] mm/mglru: use mem_cgroup_iter for global reclaim Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 3:12 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-22 7:27 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 21:18 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-23 0:45 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-09 1:25 ` [PATCH -next 2/5] mm/mglru: remove memcg lru Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 3:24 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-09 1:25 ` [PATCH -next 3/5] mm/mglru: extend shrink_one for both lrugen and non-lrugen Chen Ridong
2025-12-12 2:55 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-12 9:53 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-15 21:13 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2025-12-16 1:14 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 21:36 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-23 1:00 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 3:49 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-12-22 7:44 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-09 1:25 ` [PATCH -next 4/5] mm/mglru: combine shrink_many into shrink_node_memcgs Chen Ridong
2025-12-15 21:17 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-12-16 1:23 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 7:40 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-09 1:25 ` [PATCH -next 5/5] mm/mglru: factor lrugen state out of shrink_lruvec Chen Ridong
2025-12-12 10:15 ` [PATCH -next 0/5] mm/mglru: remove memcg lru Chen Ridong
2025-12-15 16:18 ` Michal Koutný
2025-12-16 0:45 ` Chen Ridong
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=20251215211357.GF905277@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=lujialin4@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.com \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
--cc=zhongjinji@honor.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