Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221214225123.2770216-1-yuanchu@google.com> <20230111141716.GA14685@blackbody.suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20230111141716.GA14685@blackbody.suse.cz>
From:   Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Jan 2023 17:38:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJj2-QHxcC3u49Boh7t0Z2tZfhrg_W5uLqBcMDYmukJra8D22Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] mm: multi-gen LRU: working set extensions
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 6:17 AM Michal Koutn=C3=BD <mkoutny@suse.com> wrote=
:
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:51:21PM -0800, Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com=
> wrote:
> > that's frequently used. The only missing pieces between MGLRU
> > generations and working set estimation are a consistent aging cadence
> > and an interface; we introduce the two additions.
> >
> > Periodic aging
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > MGLRU Aging is currently driven by reclaim, so the amount of time
> > between generations is non-deterministic. With memcgs being aged
> > regularly, MGLRU generations become time-based working set information.
>
> Is this periodic aging specific to memcgs? IOW, periodic aging isn't
> needed without memcgs (~with root only)
> (Perhaps similar question to Aneeh's.)
Originally, I didn't see much value in periodic aging without memcgs,
as the main goal was to provide working set information.
Periodic aging might lead to MGLRU making better reclaim decisions,
but I don't have any benchmarks to back it up right now.

>
> > Use case: proactive reclaimer
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > The proactive reclaimer sets the aging interval, and periodically reads
> > the page idle age stats, forming a working set estimation, which it the=
n
> > calculates an amount to write to memory.reclaim.
> >
> > With the page idle age stats, a proactive reclaimer could calculate a
> > precise amount of memory to reclaim without continuously probing and
> > inducing reclaim.
>
> Could the aging be also made per-memcg? (Similar to memory.reclaim,
> possibly without the new kthread (if global reclaim's aging is enough).)
It is possible. We can have hierarchical aging, invoked by writing to
memory.aging with a time duration. For every child memcg, if its young
generation is older than (current time - specified duration), do
aging.
However, now we need a userspace tool to drive the aging, invoking
this interface every few seconds, since every memcg is aged at a
different cadence.
Having a kthread perform aging has the benefit of simplicity, gives a
source of truth for the aging interval, and makes the feature more
accessible. The application developers, if they want to take a look at
the page idle age stats, could do so without needing additional
ceremony.

Thanks,
Yuanchu