Message ID | 20240206175251.3364296-1-tjmercier@google.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers |
Return-Path: <linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org> Delivered-To: ouuuleilei@gmail.com Received: by 2002:a05:7301:168b:b0:106:860b:bbdd with SMTP id ma11csp1711369dyb; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 09:53:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IED20XhamT1X/mFQ2hA+/xmpfrd0KCPW/0katwgdTZoADImLeMFl495vzosUzi8CmNWspeL X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4509:0:b0:42a:4662:48c8 with SMTP id q9-20020ac84509000000b0042a466248c8mr2539052qtn.63.1707241990603; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:53:10 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1707241990; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=DhVydiPHu31ZymGPucU2eMcOlNKsyeuO47awCXErSXEkkkSj7JVVhb8ulRF9HGY1c8 cXIdE8HXHvCgYrqu+kyLIWSj+68RIXU4zcZGK35Blhy81/UwPoTGhTkruNAlJsgh6ytC fgZdF5fD2z0gyISD26xRPkTBU/k49yKyHrvd8VQD/APtD5Dzrn8p3kdY7bdrR+b7ch0Y 6LCn58U1/rTXhlsaajMbvbkPd/AZVipHhHhXblqlPavoQ+SdcSx+vRC1hbuE49Om+xhj px1UTo0m+3n1PvthJL3ZkIttZNQ55b8scoVsuLaDnEw6FXrOPqsG695P+Ga1JqJJMBOH X56A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :mime-version:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-id:precedence :date:dkim-signature; bh=NnkI5UQ3se7RbAiVyXACobU8giPRA6UB/GtRqT8enc4=; fh=pG77438kHpLvw8oaZj/TQYYTpkUA3fMOzIrBkEXVtxk=; b=oRSp3Nq9sG6ZTYPmc9I2bBZ5FV7xEML93NKUJDK9qIn7rBNxn5gEx4LuEbUwRUiBNt aVq+lsNERyBT+nER480WLwc4884NZ7KO07nE0f35wcm7c8nJ7cSiGgyHb4xT4zCDj5Hg ReMOoE8BJCghGBbL0o+x6uqESt2rSqEDqmMURHpAV+LA/1loVZwc1JHhfXFXG+tVm5IY XIGAbJywFdfIL4QoaqUaGPXYwmro9uLkEcPY/DG36gm+tY5orWqu9TEUka310z4Vk91M qR+NdEuArjG08Il4MZI/uhBFjwGiifsPwC6W4W3driGVx0R2JeAMWcf+IvZBIzVrFDt2 SWkA==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=Q+6j5QnF; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=flex--tjmercier.bounces.google.com dkim=pass dkdomain=google.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=google.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUA1lratMG18gVSDaNslll0y+ocqXjkmvEC4PipNFLqpDyNjncp800IFrudwrewsXbtS75PNmo9f2Dhoemn5xYRVXMGHQ== Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y19-20020ac85f53000000b0042b07674ccbsi2917338qta.208.2024.02.06.09.53.10 for <ouuuleilei@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:53:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=Q+6j5QnF; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=flex--tjmercier.bounces.google.com dkim=pass dkdomain=google.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=google.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-55425-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58CD71C244E6 for <ouuuleilei@gmail.com>; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:53:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C832BDF5A; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:52:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="Q+6j5QnF" Received: from mail-pf1-f202.google.com (mail-pf1-f202.google.com [209.85.210.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 480EA134A5 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.202 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707241976; cv=none; b=NdJHEZKQjKzRt2S3GApXiw3yH5vbb5TL2IuqAncquGkdC8gL0X/JTSLn1jhDjJMF7XFHhiaSyRAw5mLCYXnbxi9ZE2b8hpdko2kQGMgXDQQqQ2a0X2vjVxrEbo0guk7oX4V8Zcj7DnEhpyTT1lChU7NflspDSSCcUChYrIP7hvk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707241976; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pn7KC3O9zKWEIlwgIeUCkjbs1TZhMmi1wHUXX84n1Vs=; h=Date:Mime-Version:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; b=uVVQPVubxCS6sohmw09nux7/69YsqaxxV7+l+Y2kPb+YDSEHVspjZYrdudIz3zk03Qp/x0XE3RqrFV6LqZKC3II0FauVENhy8adsG5+65cSaLurnNA1CDTC2+RN4y95ZJAOW04SY1lV++xPeLYvw30FcUtCsd6Sqv+PpIS9Rglk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--tjmercier.bounces.google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=Q+6j5QnF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.202 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--tjmercier.bounces.google.com Received: by mail-pf1-f202.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6e04e1ac036so2135678b3a.3 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:52:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1707241974; x=1707846774; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :mime-version:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NnkI5UQ3se7RbAiVyXACobU8giPRA6UB/GtRqT8enc4=; b=Q+6j5QnFaIqWjR521tzupPPdV0HaZ58RmPTKQW86m/4hwZo449hudap667v0bj437L Oh3v/oeBErJk63/OIfDJd6QnVnES77RyQ8T3ZQj1hiSAHix4fBP4QKm/ec5j6GYKeh2d tbFXnvyjG2ljHKNyBUPxc0RoBOEIWHjTgpPky+upToptaQf1jWRV0hYgpy+IqsdEYTIE SNseEkdfQSkq7GfhlQhTGAT40Cx07GydG4RDYo1g8HfnMy9Cc3ueJ9QK2/9VdaxEgC5y o9AL1vgin3FWfe2b5Fh3EDwGT0D5YZKN6twcCK+cEy1tMNiBm8o2G+0LKfJiMf9BvM5S uVww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707241974; x=1707846774; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :mime-version:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=NnkI5UQ3se7RbAiVyXACobU8giPRA6UB/GtRqT8enc4=; b=GahabxyPTVsDleQEncA9P80kbe2ZyEp44bqlZXs8H6ETcXqoJeXd3ItaQsRDm2rHVp bI/EtCXIlPyMUUP6SQ0PBM506uTYVyyYKJlys+b1icEB4naxo189XUhQ1k6JVOt6Du2j Ih2mmK2IV04VTPNm9Q2/3gUGDNRPP8xAXXXURbKoydhco1uerB5gt8FwXAtKiSwY4n14 Ao7+RZfoY62YXLJVxL1Xns2B6WnkB7qB4Qp/EnfUyUwURMayPfBEXrEUWUo9MJIxbdZ7 igccyi8L0Cwnf4YLHEpA8gfXU1CteC8ePYHPCRmQ/+sIqgiQDPVsUXJ8qbJFJEHYn8Fz 0riQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzpkTIKsZtD/3JWbgforUaAQvWnJYUMo3D+niPHMgde7gDjAASM nkJtTcAcQDexfB17Dq65SqqgVSShju5Z89VghmI6qOqlcn1LVhbrEuUB+sr5zBon2+x2gKLtl1I gUhc5sSZNNH9Njg== X-Received: from tj-virt.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5683]) (user=tjmercier job=sendgmr) by 2002:a05:6a00:17aa:b0:6df:ef44:90bb with SMTP id s42-20020a056a0017aa00b006dfef4490bbmr11498pfg.5.1707241974509; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 09:52:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:52:50 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0.594.gd9cf4e227d-goog Message-ID: <20240206175251.3364296-1-tjmercier@google.com> Subject: [PATCH v4] mm: memcg: Use larger batches for proactive reclaim From: "T.J. Mercier" <tjmercier@google.com> To: tjmercier@google.com, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Efly Young <yangyifei03@kuaishou.com> Cc: android-mm@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, mkoutny@suse.com, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-GMAIL-THRID: 1790172977580053093 X-GMAIL-MSGID: 1790172977580053093 |
Series |
[v4] mm: memcg: Use larger batches for proactive reclaim
|
|
Commit Message
T.J. Mercier
Feb. 6, 2024, 5:52 p.m. UTC
Before 388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive reclaim") we passed the number of pages for the reclaim request directly to try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages, which could lead to significant overreclaim. After 0388536ac291 the number of pages was limited to a maximum 32 (SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX) to reduce the amount of overreclaim. However such a small batch size caused a regression in reclaim performance due to many more reclaim start/stop cycles inside memory_reclaim. The restart cost is amortized over more pages with larger batch sizes, and becomes a significant component of the runtime if the batch size is too small. Reclaim tries to balance nr_to_reclaim fidelity with fairness across nodes and cgroups over which the pages are spread. As such, the bigger the request, the bigger the absolute overreclaim error. Historic in-kernel users of reclaim have used fixed, small sized requests to approach an appropriate reclaim rate over time. When we reclaim a user request of arbitrary size, use decaying batch sizes to manage error while maintaining reasonable throughput. MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU used root - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec) pre-0388536ac291 : 68047 10.46 post-0388536ac291 : 13742 inf (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 67352 10.51 MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU not used /uid_0 - 1G reclaim pages/sec time (sec) overreclaim (MiB) pre-0388536ac291 : 258822 1.12 107.8 post-0388536ac291 : 105174 2.49 3.5 (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 233396 1.12 -7.4 MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU not used /uid_0 - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec) pre-0388536ac291 : 72334 7.09 post-0388536ac291 : 38105 14.45 (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 72914 6.96 Fixes: 0388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive reclaim") Signed-off-by: T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@google.com> Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> Reviewed-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com> --- v4: Add additional info to commit message and move definition of batch_size per Michal Hocko. No functional changes. v3: Formatting fixes per Yosry Ahmed and Johannes Weiner. No functional changes. v2: Simplify the request size calculation per Johannes Weiner and Michal Koutný mm/memcontrol.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Comments
On Tue 06-02-24 17:52:50, T.J. Mercier wrote: > Before 388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive > reclaim") we passed the number of pages for the reclaim request directly > to try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages, which could lead to significant > overreclaim. After 0388536ac291 the number of pages was limited to a > maximum 32 (SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX) to reduce the amount of overreclaim. > However such a small batch size caused a regression in reclaim > performance due to many more reclaim start/stop cycles inside > memory_reclaim. The restart cost is amortized over more pages with > larger batch sizes, and becomes a significant component of the runtime > if the batch size is too small. > > Reclaim tries to balance nr_to_reclaim fidelity with fairness across > nodes and cgroups over which the pages are spread. As such, the bigger > the request, the bigger the absolute overreclaim error. Historic > in-kernel users of reclaim have used fixed, small sized requests to > approach an appropriate reclaim rate over time. When we reclaim a user > request of arbitrary size, use decaying batch sizes to manage error while > maintaining reasonable throughput. > > MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU used > root - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec) > pre-0388536ac291 : 68047 10.46 > post-0388536ac291 : 13742 inf > (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 67352 10.51 > > MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU not used > /uid_0 - 1G reclaim pages/sec time (sec) overreclaim (MiB) > pre-0388536ac291 : 258822 1.12 107.8 > post-0388536ac291 : 105174 2.49 3.5 > (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 233396 1.12 -7.4 > > MGLRU enabled - memcg LRU not used > /uid_0 - full reclaim pages/sec time (sec) > pre-0388536ac291 : 72334 7.09 > post-0388536ac291 : 38105 14.45 > (reclaim-reclaimed)/4 : 72914 6.96 > > Fixes: 0388536ac291 ("mm:vmscan: fix inaccurate reclaim during proactive reclaim") > Signed-off-by: T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@google.com> > Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> > Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> > Reviewed-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Sorry, I've missed this version
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c index 46d8d02114cf..02b054a316d3 100644 --- a/mm/memcontrol.c +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c @@ -6963,6 +6963,8 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf, reclaim_options = MEMCG_RECLAIM_MAY_SWAP | MEMCG_RECLAIM_PROACTIVE; while (nr_reclaimed < nr_to_reclaim) { + /* Will converge on zero, but reclaim enforces a minimum */ + unsigned long batch_size = (nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed) / 4; unsigned long reclaimed; if (signal_pending(current)) @@ -6977,8 +6979,7 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf, lru_add_drain_all(); reclaimed = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(memcg, - min(nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX), - GFP_KERNEL, reclaim_options); + batch_size, GFP_KERNEL, reclaim_options); if (!reclaimed && !nr_retries--) return -EAGAIN;