Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To:     Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: Make memory.emin the baseline for utilisation
 determination
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3] mm: Make memory.emin the baseline for utilisation
 determination
Thread-Index: AQHUuAcB1sKq7eSF7Ue9hhxxElYkPqXIUPYA
Date:   Wed, 30 Jan 2019 21:12:35 +0000
Message-ID: <20190130211226.GA6216@castle.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
References: <20190129182516.GA1834@chrisdown.name>
 <20190129190253.GA10430@chrisdown.name>
 <20190129191525.GB10430@chrisdown.name>
In-Reply-To: <20190129191525.GB10430@chrisdown.name>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [2620:10d:c090:180::1:1669]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1;BYAPR15MB2230;20:KCu0Kij4zkirSSPpDAMa1FmCaulPC8bmhz3co3hkp3wLEznaHNCAA+bejy9AoQ0dl21I86w+3daSlROrJ+S7qNNUbMmR+dnYoKmDH78f+MTAb+MDGk7Q2m9cb82I/offnacHGlkaK6HwiWcuXVLS2ziIF7rggFkYkyregTJhFpo=
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e87b0942-1915-4fbd-e157-08d686f7a820
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600110)(711020)(4605077)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020);SRVR:BYAPR15MB2230;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR15MB2230:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR15MB22306A7784D125097EE8A5E6BE900@BYAPR15MB2230.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 0933E9FD8D
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(376002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(39860400002)(189003)(199004)(9686003)(6506007)(76176011)(478600001)(2906002)(71200400001)(6512007)(81166006)(186003)(8676002)(33896004)(33656002)(25786009)(53936002)(81156014)(71190400001)(6916009)(52116002)(97736004)(102836004)(386003)(14454004)(68736007)(446003)(6116002)(105586002)(4326008)(229853002)(8936002)(46003)(86362001)(6436002)(99286004)(6246003)(54906003)(256004)(476003)(11346002)(106356001)(316002)(6486002)(7736002)(486006)(1076003)(305945005)(45673001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:BYAPR15MB2230;H:BYAPR15MB2631.namprd15.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: fb.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: m2d6xh0DOXSSl3ylnm9Tw1Z4dC/jU3iZbSLkvXGFOoXoyqbGsJAFATgTDXkFsGmIYYkeHXPAdESz3gv+wwv2HzqWHcT50VDX8BVqUHzMzwNC9sj/q1g4kz2OGM5XJ0bdetgT3XOwOEgFgVxj7zN440YFQXF2aQ+wc/9oDLUZBfpPYvXQ5LB2x+P2aiVL6/Oz+UlR/d3geSBebymgny0wDAtnGmh0NTq5NRvMFCA7kGJiaHwrYFA6BWxfc0EH+3INwl6hvy8Jnr0pL4gIV4q8hGjCYAT7Vr5AlUiRv/nLDAFengkKzyhz5Kp4aDaVYlQw0lMeKgsLxauQMDLs08JNAxdXQYWGNu44xO1UZDg2DJv3Xh5T7sC7Hj96SuFKI3KnJWozt3X0pH9AN/flfZFmhfOddCooy4mCT0573+2VwTU=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <CC376DBE2AD86543AB31870EA097DB32@namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e87b0942-1915-4fbd-e157-08d686f7a820
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Jan 2019 21:12:34.4907
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 8ae927fe-1255-47a7-a2af-5f3a069daaa2
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR15MB2230
X-OriginatorOrg: fb.com
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-01-30_16:,,
 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe
X-FB-Internal: Safe
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 02:15:25PM -0500, Chris Down wrote:
> Roman points out that when when we do the low reclaim pass, we scale the
> reclaim pressure relative to position between 0 and the maximum
> protection threshold.
>=20
> However, if the maximum protection is based on memory.elow, and
> memory.emin is above zero, this means we still may get binary behaviour
> on second-pass low reclaim. This is because we scale starting at 0, not
> starting at memory.emin, and since we don't scan at all below emin, we
> end up with cliff behaviour.
>=20
> This should be a fairly uncommon case since usually we don't go into the
> second pass, but it makes sense to scale our low reclaim pressure
> starting at emin.
>=20
> You can test this by catting two large sparse files, one in a cgroup
> with emin set to some moderate size compared to physical RAM, and
> another cgroup without any emin. In both cgroups, set an elow larger
> than 50% of physical RAM. The one with emin will have less page
> scanning, as reclaim pressure is lower.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
> Suggested-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Cc: kernel-team@fb.com

Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>

Thanks!