Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.38 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.38;
Date:   Wed, 22 Nov 2023 21:57:27 +0300
From:   Dmitry Rokosov <ddrokosov@salutedevices.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
CC:     <rostedt@goodmis.org>, <mhiramat@kernel.org>, <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>, <shakeelb@google.com>,
        <muchun.song@linux.dev>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        <kernel@sberdevices.ru>, <rockosov@gmail.com>,
        <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace
 shrink_memcg
Message-ID: <20231122185727.vcfg56d7sekdfhnm@CAB-WSD-L081021>
References: <20231122100156.6568-1-ddrokosov@salutedevices.com>
 <20231122100156.6568-3-ddrokosov@salutedevices.com>
 <ZV3WnIJMzxT-Zkt4@tiehlicka>
 <20231122105836.xhlgbwmwjdwd3g5v@CAB-WSD-L081021>
 <ZV4BK0wbUAZBIhmA@tiehlicka>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZV4BK0wbUAZBIhmA@tiehlicka>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20220415
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 02:24:59PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 22-11-23 13:58:36, Dmitry Rokosov wrote:
> > Hello Michal,
> > 
> > Thank you for the quick review!
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 11:23:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 22-11-23 13:01:56, Dmitry Rokosov wrote:
> > > > The shrink_memcg flow plays a crucial role in memcg reclamation.
> > > > Currently, it is not possible to trace this point from non-direct
> > > > reclaim paths.
> > > 
> > > Is this really true? AFAICS we have
> > > mm_vmscan_lru_isolate
> > > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active
> > > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive
> > > 
> > > which are in the vry core of the memory reclaim. Sure post processing
> > > those is some work.
> > 
> > Sure, you are absolutely right. In the usual scenario, the memcg
> > shrinker utilizes two sub-shrinkers: slab and LRU. We can enable the
> > tracepoints you mentioned and analyze them. However, there is one
> > potential issue. Enabling these tracepoints will trigger the reclaim
> > events show for all pages. Although we can filter them per pid, we
> > cannot filter them per cgroup. Nevertheless, there are times when it
> > would be extremely beneficial to comprehend the effectiveness of the
> > reclaim process within the relevant cgroup. For this reason, I am adding
> > the cgroup name to the memcg tracepoints and implementing a cumulative
> > tracepoint for memcg shrink (LRU + slab)."
> 
> I can see how printing memcg in mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_begin makes it
> easier to postprocess per memcg reclaim. But you could do that just by
> adding that to mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_{begin, end}, no? Why exactly
> does this matter for kswapd and other global reclaim contexts? 

From my point of view, kswapd and other non-direct reclaim paths are
important for memcg analysis because they also influence the memcg
reclaim statistics.

The tracepoint mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_{begin, end} is called from the
direct memcg reclaim flow, such as:
    - a direct write to the 'reclaim' node
    - changing 'max' and 'high' thresholds
    - raising the 'force_empty' mechanism
    - the charge path
    - etc.

However, it doesn't cover global reclaim contexts, so it doesn't provide
us with the full memcg reclaim statistics.

-- 
Thank you,
Dmitry