From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v3 -mm 1/3] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 12:34:04 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5193487C.3010607@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1368431172-6844-2-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
On 05/13/2013 11:46 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Memcg soft reclaim has been traditionally triggered from the global
> reclaim paths before calling shrink_zone. mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim
> then picked up a group which exceeds the soft limit the most and
> reclaimed it with 0 priority to reclaim at least SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages.
>
> The infrastructure requires per-node-zone trees which hold over-limit
> groups and keep them up-to-date (via memcg_check_events) which is not
> cost free. Although this overhead hasn't turned out to be a bottle neck
> the implementation is suboptimal because mem_cgroup_update_tree has no
> idea which zones consumed memory over the limit so we could easily end
> up having a group on a node-zone tree having only few pages from that
> node-zone.
>
> This patch doesn't try to fix node-zone trees management because it
> seems that integrating soft reclaim into zone shrinking sounds much
> easier and more appropriate for several reasons.
> First of all 0 priority reclaim was a crude hack which might lead to
> big stalls if the group's LRUs are big and hard to reclaim (e.g. a lot
> of dirty/writeback pages).
> Soft reclaim should be applicable also to the targeted reclaim which is
> awkward right now without additional hacks.
> Last but not least the whole infrastructure eats quite some code.
>
> After this patch shrink_zone is done in 2 passes. First it tries to do the
> soft reclaim if appropriate (only for global reclaim for now to keep
> compatible with the original state) and fall back to ignoring soft limit
> if no group is eligible to soft reclaim or nothing has been scanned
> during the first pass. Only groups which are over their soft limit or
> any of their parents up the hierarchy is over the limit are considered
> eligible during the first pass.
>
> Soft limit tree which is not necessary anymore will be removed in the
> follow up patch to make this patch smaller and easier to review.
>
> Changes since v1
> - __shrink_zone doesn't return the number of shrunk groups as nr_scanned
> test covers both no groups scanned and no pages from the required zone
> as pointed by Johannes
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Patch looks fine to me
Reviewed-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@openvz.org>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-15 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-13 7:46 [patch v3 0/3 -mm] Soft limit rework Michal Hocko
2013-05-13 7:46 ` [patch v3 -mm 1/3] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code Michal Hocko
2013-05-15 8:34 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2013-05-16 22:12 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-16 22:15 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-17 7:16 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-17 7:12 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-17 16:02 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-05-17 16:57 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-17 17:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-05-17 17:45 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-20 14:44 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-21 6:53 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-27 17:13 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-27 17:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] memcg: track children in soft limit excess to improve soft limit Michal Hocko
2013-05-27 17:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] memcg, vmscan: Do not attempt soft limit reclaim if it would not scan anything Michal Hocko
2013-05-27 17:13 ` [PATCH 3/3] memcg: Track all children over limit in the root Michal Hocko
2013-05-27 17:20 ` [PATCH] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates Michal Hocko
2013-05-29 13:05 ` [patch v3 -mm 1/3] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code Michal Hocko
2013-05-29 15:57 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-29 20:01 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-05-30 8:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-29 14:54 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-30 8:36 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-13 7:46 ` [patch v3 -mm 2/3] memcg: Get rid of soft-limit tree infrastructure Michal Hocko
2013-05-15 8:38 ` Glauber Costa
2013-05-16 22:16 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-13 7:46 ` [patch v3 -mm 3/3] vmscan, memcg: Do softlimit reclaim also for targeted reclaim Michal Hocko
2013-05-15 8:42 ` Glauber Costa
2013-05-17 7:50 ` Michal Hocko
2013-05-16 23:12 ` Tejun Heo
2013-05-17 7:34 ` Michal Hocko
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=5193487C.3010607@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=yinghan@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