From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FCE3C433F5 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 16:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F3D3E8D0001; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:45:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EECBE6B0073; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:45:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D8DBC8D0001; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:45:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0087.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.87]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C3A6B0072 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:45:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857FBA0FAD for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 16:45:34 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79243567788.25.BAADE92 Received: from mail-vs1-f43.google.com (mail-vs1-f43.google.com [209.85.217.43]) by imf08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016C1160013 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 16:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-f43.google.com with SMTP id t124so6086770vsb.7 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:45:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AK6xQEzNUd1duBz+V1fGWLl/8kdUc06iK3+U1HXRjMo=; b=s67JNRlTb4fgxk/9MHbNMID4yckc1N0y4F1nwnI5A5QmtYN8ZJ8xeBmj4G7HCKKOib 3t5loeG2myKl1qM85EH7iiE7UjGcQRjnobKJwNjxqz4UEgDCj0VHq2qIe0F8k/3Id+Yw 2xrNT+LRWHzn2beP0j9vtTNUfhyJ7YrSLxEX4CIf5gkQBJHvzFIbv5SvNfogwlKB9jaz 3PVpS6hrzvFxrX7YmeA+3psFuv2TqlMjvOYfhwvc7KbtofhJEpP5CCWWTYunpUrJzJ8Z Bks4WPvNi9f3QIjv4iyi/d0L72cscRYhEghBgbPJ+T6ct0Usd2y79ype4iVXlKKbPxgJ JA0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AK6xQEzNUd1duBz+V1fGWLl/8kdUc06iK3+U1HXRjMo=; b=4hFOQr4BlBX0cFifQVnXI74UqSQLhwrGpjXKtPMW8stL2KZU1dP1O6CkO5J8hEykUK YSxUiLT4SRhcr0PxuvfLk0kWCs2VlTtHXj1FcnlNaIivbkCIzsZSCb0FnTy9CMSJ99xa kiSU4XQT87Q8x1RNck5lVu9wiOUCyUk/ZmxqsNRbMUdQBYLt+2yA31mq2rpv1A3yq6Hq Lt1JElsh5kJ6AfOxbhCvqE+TFMtETBVDVUZhXf4sJAbfpglwTHCyBDZF7RyZ7XZ5dZZi pTzvEqhzTrj1N7PRHqC7KfVMh2bEUJEoXYMtvWkA6yiulGLev4dQ1CcXCW/0uS/PF4Ds pbgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532DakH0m1HtgfGgMBnbUyGWmKuMEh471TSgVCr4LO3HzsXvIt1z hUy7awbvo1B2fYN+9gkQdE8MyUm3+5m9BNjh7gNd5Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxItz/ZL1udHjdruNW05yngkUA9HNr7DupiDKhUsGJNi3CQjWpVNvETb3XoDdRgCaeVdt1dESHMLDkgH0IAY3g= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:f0c:b0:320:9156:732f with SMTP id v12-20020a0561020f0c00b003209156732fmr10338597vss.6.1647276332996; Mon, 14 Mar 2022 09:45:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220208081902.3550911-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220208081902.3550911-5-yuzhao@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yu Zhao Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 10:45:21 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/12] mm: multigenerational LRU: groundwork To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , Andi Kleen , Aneesh Kumar , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Jens Axboe , Jesse Barnes , Jonathan Corbet , Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox , Michael Larabel , Mike Rapoport , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon , Ying Huang , LAK , Linux Doc Mailing List , LKML , Linux-MM , Kernel Page Reclaim v2 , x86 , Brian Geffon , Jan Alexander Steffens , Oleksandr Natalenko , Steven Barrett , Suleiman Souhlal , Daniel Byrne , Donald Carr , =?UTF-8?Q?Holger_Hoffst=C3=A4tte?= , Konstantin Kharlamov , Shuang Zhai , Sofia Trinh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf08.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=s67JNRlT; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com; spf=pass (imf08.hostedemail.com: domain of yuzhao@google.com designates 209.85.217.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yuzhao@google.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 016C1160013 X-Stat-Signature: 8p8iyfz5n5udh7d57m38u1ztizqujimm X-HE-Tag: 1647276333-419721 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:12 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > We used to put a faulted file page in inactive, if we access it a > > > > > > second time, it can be promoted > > > > > > to active. then in recent years, we have also applied this to anon > > > > > > pages while kernel adds > > > > > > workingset protection for anon pages. so basically both anon and file > > > > > > pages go into the inactive > > > > > > list for the 1st time, if we access it for the second time, they go to > > > > > > the active list. if we don't access > > > > > > it any more, they are likely to be reclaimed as they are inactive. > > > > > > we do have some special fastpath for code section, executable file > > > > > > pages are kept on active list > > > > > > as long as they are accessed. > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > > > so all of the above concerns are actually not that correct? > > > > > > > > > > They are valid concerns but I don't know any popular workloads that > > > > > care about them. > > > > > > > > Hi Yu, > > > > here we can get a workload in Kim's patchset while he added workingset > > > > protection > > > > for anon pages: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mm/cover/1581401993-20041-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com/ > > > > > > Thanks. I wouldn't call that a workload because it's not a real > > > application. By popular workloads, I mean applications that the > > > majority of people actually run on phones, in cloud, etc. > > > > > > > anon pages used to go to active rather than inactive, but kim's patchset > > > > moved to use inactive first. then only after the anon page is accessed > > > > second time, it can move to active. > > > > > > Yes. To clarify, the A-bit doesn't really mean the first or second > > > access. It can be many accesses each time it's set. > > > > > > > "In current implementation, newly created or swap-in anonymous page is > > > > > > > > started on the active list. Growing the active list results in rebalancing > > > > active/inactive list so old pages on the active list are demoted to the > > > > inactive list. Hence, hot page on the active list isn't protected at all. > > > > > > > > Following is an example of this situation. > > > > > > > > Assume that 50 hot pages on active list and system can contain total > > > > 100 pages. Numbers denote the number of pages on active/inactive > > > > list (active | inactive). (h) stands for hot pages and (uo) stands for > > > > used-once pages. > > > > > > > > 1. 50 hot pages on active list > > > > 50(h) | 0 > > > > > > > > 2. workload: 50 newly created (used-once) pages > > > > 50(uo) | 50(h) > > > > > > > > 3. workload: another 50 newly created (used-once) pages > > > > 50(uo) | 50(uo), swap-out 50(h) > > > > > > > > As we can see, hot pages are swapped-out and it would cause swap-in later." > > > > > > > > Is MGLRU able to avoid the swap-out of the 50 hot pages? > > > > > > I think the real question is why the 50 hot pages can be moved to the > > > inactive list. If they are really hot, the A-bit should protect them. > > > > This is a good question. > > > > I guess it is probably because the current lru is trying to maintain a balance > > between the sizes of active and inactive lists. Thus, it can shrink active list > > even though pages might be still "hot" but not the recently accessed ones. > > > > 1. 50 hot pages on active list > > 50(h) | 0 > > > > 2. workload: 50 newly created (used-once) pages > > 50(uo) | 50(h) > > > > 3. workload: another 50 newly created (used-once) pages > > 50(uo) | 50(uo), swap-out 50(h) > > > > the old kernel without anon workingset protection put workload 2 on active, so > > pushed 50 hot pages from active to inactive. workload 3 would further contribute > > to evict the 50 hot pages. > > > > it seems mglru doesn't demote pages from the youngest generation to older > > generation only in order to balance the list size? so mglru is probably safe > > in these cases. > > > > I will run some tests mentioned in Kim's patchset and report the result to you > > afterwards. > > > > Hi Yu, > I did find putting faulted pages to the youngest generation lead to some > regression in the case ebizzy Kim's patchset mentioned while he tried > to support workingset protection for anon pages. > i did a little bit modification for rand_chunk() which is probably similar > with the modifcation() Kim mentioned in his patchset. The modification > can be found here: > https://github.com/21cnbao/ltp/commit/7134413d747bfa9ef > > The test env is a x86 machine in which I have set memory size to 2.5GB and > set zRAM to 2GB and disabled external disk swap. > > with the vanilla kernel: > \time -v ./a.out -vv -t 4 -s 209715200 -S 200000 > > so we have 10 chunks and 4 threads, each trunk is 209715200(200MB) > > typical result: > Command being timed: "./a.out -vv -t 4 -s 209715200 -S 200000" > User time (seconds): 36.19 > System time (seconds): 229.72 > Percent of CPU this job got: 371% > Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 1:11.59 > Average shared text size (kbytes): 0 > Average unshared data size (kbytes): 0 > Average stack size (kbytes): 0 > Average total size (kbytes): 0 > Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 2166196 > Average resident set size (kbytes): 0 > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 9990128 > Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 33315945 > Voluntary context switches: 59144 > Involuntary context switches: 167754 > Swaps: 0 > File system inputs: 2760 > File system outputs: 8 > Socket messages sent: 0 > Socket messages received: 0 > Signals delivered: 0 > Page size (bytes): 4096 > Exit status: 0 > > with gen_lru and lru_gen/enabled=0x3: > typical result: > Command being timed: "./a.out -vv -t 4 -s 209715200 -S 200000" > User time (seconds): 36.34 > System time (seconds): 276.07 > Percent of CPU this job got: 378% > Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 1:22.46 > **** 15% time + > Average shared text size (kbytes): 0 > Average unshared data size (kbytes): 0 > Average stack size (kbytes): 0 > Average total size (kbytes): 0 > Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 2168120 > Average resident set size (kbytes): 0 > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 13362810 > ***** 30% page fault + > Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 33394617 > Voluntary context switches: 55216 > Involuntary context switches: 137220 > Swaps: 0 > File system inputs: 4088 > File system outputs: 8 > Socket messages sent: 0 > Socket messages received: 0 > Signals delivered: 0 > Page size (bytes): 4096 > Exit status: 0 > > with gen_lru and lru_gen/enabled=0x7: > typical result: > Command being timed: "./a.out -vv -t 4 -s 209715200 -S 200000" > User time (seconds): 36.13 > System time (seconds): 251.71 > Percent of CPU this job got: 378% > Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 1:16.00 > *****better than enabled=0x3, worse than vanilla > Average shared text size (kbytes): 0 > Average unshared data size (kbytes): 0 > Average stack size (kbytes): 0 > Average total size (kbytes): 0 > Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 2120988 > Average resident set size (kbytes): 0 > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 12706512 > Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 33422243 > Voluntary context switches: 49485 > Involuntary context switches: 126765 > Swaps: 0 > File system inputs: 2976 > File system outputs: 8 > Socket messages sent: 0 > Socket messages received: 0 > Signals delivered: 0 > Page size (bytes): 4096 > Exit status: 0 > > I can also reproduce the problem on arm64. > > I am not saying this is going to block mglru from being mainlined. But I am > still curious if this is an issue worth being addressed somehow in mglru. You've missed something very important: *thoughput* :) Dollars to doughnuts there was a large increase in throughput -- I haven't tried this benchmark but I've seen many reports similar to this one.