linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.


  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