linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kairui Song via B4 Relay <devnull+kasong.tencent.com@kernel.org>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
	Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>,  Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	 David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	 Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
	 Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,  Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
	David Stevens <stevensd@google.com>,
	 Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>,
	Leno Hou <lenohou@gmail.com>,  Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
	Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
	 Zicheng Wang <wangzicheng@honor.com>,
	Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@google.com>,
	 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>,  Vernon Yang <vernon2gm@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,  Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	 Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 14/14] mm/vmscan: unify writeback reclaim statistic and throttling
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 19:57:43 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260407-mglru-reclaim-v4-14-98cf3dc69519@tencent.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260407-mglru-reclaim-v4-0-98cf3dc69519@tencent.com>

From: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>

Currently MGLRU and non-MGLRU handle the reclaim statistic and
writeback handling very differently, especially throttling.
Basically MGLRU just ignored the throttling part.

Let's just unify this part, use a helper to deduplicate the code
so both setups will share the same behavior.

Test using following reproducer using bash:

  echo "Setup a slow device using dm delay"
  dd if=/dev/zero of=/var/tmp/backing bs=1M count=2048
  LOOP=$(losetup --show -f /var/tmp/backing)
  mkfs.ext4 -q $LOOP
  echo "0 $(blockdev --getsz $LOOP) delay $LOOP 0 0 $LOOP 0 1000" | \
      dmsetup create slow_dev
  mkdir -p /mnt/slow && mount /dev/mapper/slow_dev /mnt/slow

  echo "Start writeback pressure"
  sync && echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
  mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb
  echo 128M > /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb/memory.max
  (echo $BASHPID > /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb/cgroup.procs && \
      dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/slow/testfile bs=1M count=192)

  echo "Clean up"
  echo "0 $(blockdev --getsz $LOOP) error" | dmsetup load slow_dev
  dmsetup resume slow_dev
  umount -l /mnt/slow && sync
  dmsetup remove slow_dev

Before this commit, `dd` will get OOM killed immediately if
MGLRU is enabled. Classic LRU is fine.

After this commit, throttling is now effective and no more spin on
LRU or premature OOM. Stress test on other workloads also looking good.

Global throttling is not here yet, we will fix that separately later.

Suggested-by: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
Tested-by: Leno Hou <lenohou@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index cea6df51dcff..609cbaf2cd4e 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1942,6 +1942,44 @@ static int current_may_throttle(void)
 	return !(current->flags & PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE);
 }
 
+static void handle_reclaim_writeback(unsigned long nr_taken,
+				     struct pglist_data *pgdat,
+				     struct scan_control *sc,
+				     struct reclaim_stat *stat)
+{
+	/*
+	 * If dirty folios are scanned that are not queued for IO, it
+	 * implies that flushers are not doing their job. This can
+	 * happen when memory pressure pushes dirty folios to the end of
+	 * the LRU before the dirty limits are breached and the dirty
+	 * data has expired. It can also happen when the proportion of
+	 * dirty folios grows not through writes but through memory
+	 * pressure reclaiming all the clean cache. And in some cases,
+	 * the flushers simply cannot keep up with the allocation
+	 * rate. Nudge the flusher threads in case they are asleep.
+	 */
+	if (stat->nr_unqueued_dirty == nr_taken && nr_taken) {
+		wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN);
+		/*
+		 * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up
+		 * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios
+		 * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()).
+		 *
+		 * Flusher may not be able to issue writeback quickly
+		 * enough for cgroupv1 writeback throttling to work
+		 * on a large system.
+		 */
+		if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc))
+			reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK);
+	}
+
+	sc->nr.dirty += stat->nr_dirty;
+	sc->nr.congested += stat->nr_congested;
+	sc->nr.writeback += stat->nr_writeback;
+	sc->nr.immediate += stat->nr_immediate;
+	sc->nr.taken += nr_taken;
+}
+
 /*
  * shrink_inactive_list() is a helper for shrink_node().  It returns the number
  * of reclaimed pages
@@ -2005,39 +2043,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
 	lruvec_lock_irq(lruvec);
 	lru_note_cost_unlock_irq(lruvec, file, stat.nr_pageout,
 					nr_scanned - nr_reclaimed);
-
-	/*
-	 * If dirty folios are scanned that are not queued for IO, it
-	 * implies that flushers are not doing their job. This can
-	 * happen when memory pressure pushes dirty folios to the end of
-	 * the LRU before the dirty limits are breached and the dirty
-	 * data has expired. It can also happen when the proportion of
-	 * dirty folios grows not through writes but through memory
-	 * pressure reclaiming all the clean cache. And in some cases,
-	 * the flushers simply cannot keep up with the allocation
-	 * rate. Nudge the flusher threads in case they are asleep.
-	 */
-	if (stat.nr_unqueued_dirty == nr_taken) {
-		wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN);
-		/*
-		 * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up
-		 * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios
-		 * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()).
-		 *
-		 * Flusher may not be able to issue writeback quickly
-		 * enough for cgroupv1 writeback throttling to work
-		 * on a large system.
-		 */
-		if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc))
-			reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK);
-	}
-
-	sc->nr.dirty += stat.nr_dirty;
-	sc->nr.congested += stat.nr_congested;
-	sc->nr.writeback += stat.nr_writeback;
-	sc->nr.immediate += stat.nr_immediate;
-	sc->nr.taken += nr_taken;
-
+	handle_reclaim_writeback(nr_taken, pgdat, sc, &stat);
 	trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive(pgdat->node_id,
 			nr_scanned, nr_reclaimed, &stat, sc->priority, file);
 	return nr_reclaimed;
@@ -4824,26 +4830,11 @@ static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 retry:
 	reclaimed = shrink_folio_list(&list, pgdat, sc, &stat, false, memcg);
 	sc->nr_reclaimed += reclaimed;
+	handle_reclaim_writeback(isolated, pgdat, sc, &stat);
 	trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive(pgdat->node_id,
 			type_scanned, reclaimed, &stat, sc->priority,
 			type ? LRU_INACTIVE_FILE : LRU_INACTIVE_ANON);
 
-	/*
-	 * If too many file cache in the coldest generation can't be evicted
-	 * due to being dirty, wake up the flusher.
-	 */
-	if (stat.nr_unqueued_dirty == isolated) {
-		wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN);
-
-		/*
-		 * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up
-		 * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios
-		 * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()).
-		 */
-		if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc))
-			reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK);
-	}
-
 	list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(folio, next, &list, lru) {
 		DEFINE_MIN_SEQ(lruvec);
 
@@ -4886,6 +4877,7 @@ static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 
 	if (!list_empty(&list)) {
 		skip_retry = true;
+		isolated = 0;
 		goto retry;
 	}
 

-- 
2.53.0




      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-04-07 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-07 11:57 [PATCH v4 00/14] mm/mglru: improve reclaim loop and dirty folio handling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 01/14] mm/mglru: consolidate common code for retrieving evictable size Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 02/14] mm/mglru: rename variables related to aging and rotation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 03/14] mm/mglru: relocate the LRU scan batch limit to callers Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-08  3:12   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 04/14] mm/mglru: restructure the reclaim loop Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-08  8:08   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-08  8:43     ` Kairui Song
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 05/14] mm/mglru: scan and count the exact number of folios Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-08  8:27   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 06/14] mm/mglru: use a smaller batch for reclaim Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 07/14] mm/mglru: don't abort scan immediately right after aging Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-08  9:32   ` Chen Ridong
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 08/14] mm/mglru: remove redundant swap constrained check upon isolation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 09/14] mm/mglru: use the common routine for dirty/writeback reactivation Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 10/14] mm/mglru: simplify and improve dirty writeback handling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 11/14] mm/mglru: remove no longer used reclaim argument for folio protection Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 12/14] mm/vmscan: remove sc->file_taken Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v4 13/14] mm/vmscan: remove sc->unqueued_dirty Kairui Song via B4 Relay
2026-04-07 11:57 ` Kairui Song via B4 Relay [this message]

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=20260407-mglru-reclaim-v4-14-98cf3dc69519@tencent.com \
    --to=devnull+kasong.tencent.com@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kaleshsingh@google.com \
    --cc=kasong@tencent.com \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=lenohou@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=stevensd@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vernon2gm@gmail.com \
    --cc=wangzicheng@honor.com \
    --cc=weixugc@google.com \
    --cc=yuanchu@google.com \
    --cc=yuzhao@google.com \
    --cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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