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 09/14] mm/mglru: use the common routine for dirty/writeback reactivation
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 19:57:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260407-mglru-reclaim-v4-9-98cf3dc69519@tencent.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260407-mglru-reclaim-v4-0-98cf3dc69519@tencent.com>
From: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
Currently MGLRU will move the dirty writeback folios to the second
oldest gen instead of reactivate them like the classical LRU. This
might help to reduce the LRU contention as it skipped the isolation.
But as a result we will see these folios at the LRU tail more frequently
leading to inefficient reclaim.
Besides, the dirty / writeback check after isolation in
shrink_folio_list is more accurate and covers more cases. So instead,
just drop the special handling for dirty writeback, use the common
routine and re-activate it like the classical LRU.
This should in theory improve the scan efficiency. These folios will be
rotated back to LRU tail once writeback is done so there is no risk of
hotness inversion. And now each reclaim loop will have a higher
success rate. This also prepares for unifying the writeback and
throttling mechanism with classical LRU, we keep these folios far from
tail so detecting the tail batch will have a similar pattern with
classical LRU.
The micro optimization that avoids LRU contention by skipping the
isolation is gone, which should be fine. Compared to IO and writeback
cost, the isolation overhead is trivial.
And using the common routine also keeps the folio's referenced bits,
which could improve metrics in the long term. Also no more need to clean
reclaim bit as the common routine will make use of it.
Reviewed-by: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 19 -------------------
1 file changed, 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index b60cb579c15c..2a722ebec4d8 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -4578,7 +4578,6 @@ static bool sort_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct scan_c
int tier_idx)
{
bool success;
- bool dirty, writeback;
int gen = folio_lru_gen(folio);
int type = folio_is_file_lru(folio);
int zone = folio_zonenum(folio);
@@ -4628,21 +4627,6 @@ static bool sort_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct scan_c
return true;
}
- dirty = folio_test_dirty(folio);
- writeback = folio_test_writeback(folio);
- if (type == LRU_GEN_FILE && dirty) {
- sc->nr.file_taken += delta;
- if (!writeback)
- sc->nr.unqueued_dirty += delta;
- }
-
- /* waiting for writeback */
- if (writeback || (type == LRU_GEN_FILE && dirty)) {
- gen = folio_inc_gen(lruvec, folio, true);
- list_move(&folio->lru, &lrugen->folios[gen][type][zone]);
- return true;
- }
-
return false;
}
@@ -4664,9 +4648,6 @@ static bool isolate_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct sca
if (!folio_test_referenced(folio))
set_mask_bits(&folio->flags.f, LRU_REFS_MASK, 0);
- /* for shrink_folio_list() */
- folio_clear_reclaim(folio);
-
success = lru_gen_del_folio(lruvec, folio, true);
VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!success, folio);
--
2.53.0
next prev 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 ` Kairui Song via B4 Relay [this message]
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 ` [PATCH v4 14/14] mm/vmscan: unify writeback reclaim statistic and throttling Kairui Song via B4 Relay
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-v4-9-98cf3dc69519@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