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;
Date:   Fri, 7 Jul 2023 12:09:31 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Efly Young <yangyifei03@kuaishou.com>
Cc:     <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive
 reclaim
Message-Id: <20230707120931.f2ec7f5c53c5dd2788afda11@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230707103226.38496-1-yangyifei03@kuaishou.com>
References: <20230707103226.38496-1-yangyifei03@kuaishou.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

(cc hannes)

On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 18:32:26 +0800 Efly Young <yangyifei03@kuaishou.com> wrote:

> With commit f53af4285d77 ("mm: vmscan: fix extreme overreclaim
> and swap floods"), proactive reclaim still seems inaccurate.
> 
> Our problematic scene also are almost anon pages. Request 1G
> by writing memory.reclaim will reclaim 1.7G or other values
> more than 1G by swapping.
> 
> This try to fix the inaccurate reclaim problem.

It would be helpful to have some additional explanation of why you
believe the current code is incorrect?

> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -6208,7 +6208,7 @@ static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc)
>  	unsigned long nr_to_scan;
>  	enum lru_list lru;
>  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
> -	unsigned long nr_to_reclaim = sc->nr_to_reclaim;
> +	unsigned long nr_to_reclaim = (sc->nr_to_reclaim - sc->nr_reclaimed);
>  	bool proportional_reclaim;
>  	struct blk_plug plug;
>