From: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
Reclaim anonymous pages if a migration path is available now that
demotion provides a non-swap recourse for reclaiming anon pages.
Note that this check is subtly different from the
anon_should_be_aged() checks. This mechanism checks whether a
specific page in a specific context *can* actually be reclaimed, given
current swap space and cgroup limits
anon_should_be_aged() is a much simpler and more prelimiary check
which just says whether there is a possibility of future reclaim.
#Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
Cc: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
Cc: Yang Shi <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
Cc: Huang Ying <[email protected]>
Cc: Dan Williams <[email protected]>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
Cc: osalvador <[email protected]>
--
Changes from Dave 10/2020:
* remove 'total_swap_pages' modification
Changes from Dave 06/2020:
* rename reclaim_anon_pages()->can_reclaim_anon_pages()
Note: Keith's Intel SoB is commented out because he is no
longer at Intel and his @intel.com mail will bounce.
---
b/mm/vmscan.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/vmscan.c~0009-mm-vmscan-Consider-anonymous-pages-without-swap mm/vmscan.c
--- a/mm/vmscan.c~0009-mm-vmscan-Consider-anonymous-pages-without-swap 2021-03-04 15:35:59.994806420 -0800
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c 2021-03-04 15:36:00.001806420 -0800
@@ -287,6 +287,34 @@ static bool writeback_throttling_sane(st
}
#endif
+static inline bool can_reclaim_anon_pages(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
+ int node_id)
+{
+ if (memcg == NULL) {
+ /*
+ * For non-memcg reclaim, is there
+ * space in any swap device?
+ */
+ if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
+ return true;
+ } else {
+ /* Is the memcg below its swap limit? */
+ if (mem_cgroup_get_nr_swap_pages(memcg) > 0)
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * The page can not be swapped.
+ *
+ * Can it be reclaimed from this node via demotion?
+ */
+ if (next_demotion_node(node_id) >= 0)
+ return true;
+
+ /* No way to reclaim anon pages */
+ return false;
+}
+
/*
* This misses isolated pages which are not accounted for to save counters.
* As the data only determines if reclaim or compaction continues, it is
@@ -298,7 +326,7 @@ unsigned long zone_reclaimable_pages(str
nr = zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_FILE) +
zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_FILE);
- if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
+ if (can_reclaim_anon_pages(NULL, zone_to_nid(zone)))
nr += zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_ANON) +
zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_ANON);
@@ -2332,6 +2360,7 @@ enum scan_balance {
static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc,
unsigned long *nr)
{
+ struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
unsigned long anon_cost, file_cost, total_cost;
int swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(memcg);
@@ -2342,7 +2371,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec
enum lru_list lru;
/* If we have no swap space, do not bother scanning anon pages. */
- if (!sc->may_swap || mem_cgroup_get_nr_swap_pages(memcg) <= 0) {
+ if (!sc->may_swap || !can_reclaim_anon_pages(memcg, pgdat->node_id)) {
scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
goto out;
}
@@ -2717,7 +2746,7 @@ static inline bool should_continue_recla
*/
pages_for_compaction = compact_gap(sc->order);
inactive_lru_pages = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
- if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
+ if (can_reclaim_anon_pages(NULL, pgdat->node_id))
inactive_lru_pages += node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
return inactive_lru_pages > pages_for_compaction;
_
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 4:01 PM Dave Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> From: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
>
> Reclaim anonymous pages if a migration path is available now that
> demotion provides a non-swap recourse for reclaiming anon pages.
>
> Note that this check is subtly different from the
> anon_should_be_aged() checks. This mechanism checks whether a
> specific page in a specific context *can* actually be reclaimed, given
> current swap space and cgroup limits
>
> anon_should_be_aged() is a much simpler and more prelimiary check
Just a typo, s/prelimiary/preliminary
> which just says whether there is a possibility of future reclaim.
Reviewed-by: Yang Shi <[email protected]>
>
> #Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
> Cc: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Yang Shi <[email protected]>
> Cc: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
> Cc: Huang Ying <[email protected]>
> Cc: Dan Williams <[email protected]>
> Cc: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
> Cc: osalvador <[email protected]>
>
> --
>
> Changes from Dave 10/2020:
> * remove 'total_swap_pages' modification
>
> Changes from Dave 06/2020:
> * rename reclaim_anon_pages()->can_reclaim_anon_pages()
>
> Note: Keith's Intel SoB is commented out because he is no
> longer at Intel and his @intel.com mail will bounce.
> ---
>
> b/mm/vmscan.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN mm/vmscan.c~0009-mm-vmscan-Consider-anonymous-pages-without-swap mm/vmscan.c
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c~0009-mm-vmscan-Consider-anonymous-pages-without-swap 2021-03-04 15:35:59.994806420 -0800
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c 2021-03-04 15:36:00.001806420 -0800
> @@ -287,6 +287,34 @@ static bool writeback_throttling_sane(st
> }
> #endif
>
> +static inline bool can_reclaim_anon_pages(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> + int node_id)
> +{
> + if (memcg == NULL) {
> + /*
> + * For non-memcg reclaim, is there
> + * space in any swap device?
> + */
> + if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
> + return true;
> + } else {
> + /* Is the memcg below its swap limit? */
> + if (mem_cgroup_get_nr_swap_pages(memcg) > 0)
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * The page can not be swapped.
> + *
> + * Can it be reclaimed from this node via demotion?
> + */
> + if (next_demotion_node(node_id) >= 0)
> + return true;
> +
> + /* No way to reclaim anon pages */
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * This misses isolated pages which are not accounted for to save counters.
> * As the data only determines if reclaim or compaction continues, it is
> @@ -298,7 +326,7 @@ unsigned long zone_reclaimable_pages(str
>
> nr = zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_FILE) +
> zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_FILE);
> - if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
> + if (can_reclaim_anon_pages(NULL, zone_to_nid(zone)))
> nr += zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_ANON) +
> zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_ANON);
>
> @@ -2332,6 +2360,7 @@ enum scan_balance {
> static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc,
> unsigned long *nr)
> {
> + struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> struct mem_cgroup *memcg = lruvec_memcg(lruvec);
> unsigned long anon_cost, file_cost, total_cost;
> int swappiness = mem_cgroup_swappiness(memcg);
> @@ -2342,7 +2371,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec
> enum lru_list lru;
>
> /* If we have no swap space, do not bother scanning anon pages. */
> - if (!sc->may_swap || mem_cgroup_get_nr_swap_pages(memcg) <= 0) {
> + if (!sc->may_swap || !can_reclaim_anon_pages(memcg, pgdat->node_id)) {
> scan_balance = SCAN_FILE;
> goto out;
> }
> @@ -2717,7 +2746,7 @@ static inline bool should_continue_recla
> */
> pages_for_compaction = compact_gap(sc->order);
> inactive_lru_pages = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
> - if (get_nr_swap_pages() > 0)
> + if (can_reclaim_anon_pages(NULL, pgdat->node_id))
> inactive_lru_pages += node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
>
> return inactive_lru_pages > pages_for_compaction;
> _
>
On 3/8/21 4:17 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
>> Reclaim anonymous pages if a migration path is available now that
>> demotion provides a non-swap recourse for reclaiming anon pages.
>>
>> Note that this check is subtly different from the
>> anon_should_be_aged() checks. This mechanism checks whether a
>> specific page in a specific context *can* actually be reclaimed, given
>> current swap space and cgroup limits
>>
>> anon_should_be_aged() is a much simpler and more prelimiary check
> Just a typo, s/prelimiary/preliminary
Got it.
Thanks for the continued review, and the review tags! I'll hopefully
get a new version of this out the door next week.