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;
Date:   Mon, 1 Jul 2019 15:56:35 +0800
From:   Kuo-Hsin Yang <vovoy@chromium.org>
To:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: vmscan: fix not scanning anonymous pages when
 detecting file refaults
Message-ID: <20190701075635.GA79748@google.com>
References: <20190619080835.GA68312@google.com>
 <20190628111627.GA107040@google.com>
 <20190628143201.GB17212@cmpxchg.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190628143201.GB17212@cmpxchg.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32:01AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 07:16:27PM +0800, Kuo-Hsin Yang wrote:
> > Commit 2a2e48854d70 ("mm: vmscan: fix IO/refault regression in cache
> > workingset transition") introduced actual_reclaim parameter.  When file
> > refaults are detected, inactive_list_is_low() may return different
> > values depends on the actual_reclaim parameter.  Vmscan would only scan
> > active/inactive file lists at file thrashing state when the following 2
> > conditions are satisfied.
> > 
> > 1) inactive_list_is_low() returns false in get_scan_count() to trigger
> >    scanning file lists only.
> > 2) inactive_list_is_low() returns true in shrink_list() to allow
> >    scanning active file list.
> > 
> > This patch makes the return value of inactive_list_is_low() independent
> > of actual_reclaim and rename the parameter back to trace.
> 
> This is not. The root cause for the problem you describe isn't the
> patch you point to. The root cause is our decision to force-scan the
> file LRU based on relative inactive:active size alone, without taking
> file thrashing into account at all. This is a much older problem.
> 
> After the referenced patch, we're taking thrashing into account when
> deciding whether to deactivate active file pages or not. To solve the
> problem pointed out here, we can extend that same principle to the
> decision whether to force-scan files and skip the anon LRUs.
> 
> The patch you're pointing to isn't the culprit. On the contrary, it
> provides the infrastructure to solve a much older problem.
> 
> > Fixes: 2a2e48854d70 ("mm: vmscan: fix IO/refault regression in cache workingset transition")
> 
> Please replace this line with the two Fixes: lines that I provided
> earlier in this thread.

Thanks for your clarification, I will update the changelog.