mm: add new LRU list for MADV_FREE pages
Subsystems (21)
cover mm: add new LRU list for MADV_FREE pages
Hi,
We are trying to use MADV_FREE in jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use the MADV_FREE feature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And since MADV_FREE pages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaim MADV_FREE pages. In current implementation, MADV_FREE will fallback to MADV_DONTNEED without swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup using MADV_FREE.
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for MADV_FREE pages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, because MADV_FREE pages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim a MADV_FREE page, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom with MADV_FREE enabled and nothing without it.
- RSS accounting. MADV_FREE pages are accounted as normal anon pages and reclaimed lazily, so application's RSS becomes bigger. This confuses our workloads. We have monitoring daemon running and if it finds applications' RSS becomes abnormal, the daemon will kill the applications even kernel can reclaim the memory easily. Currently we don't export separate RSS accounting for MADV_FREE pages. This will prevent our setup using MADV_FREE too.
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for MADV_FREE pages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaim MADV_FREE pages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If only MADV_FREE pages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.
Actually Minchan posted patches to add the LRU list before, but he didn't pursue. So I picked up them and the patches are based on Minchan's previous patches. The main difference between my patches and Minchan previous patches is page reclaim policy. Minchan's patches introduces a knob to balance the reclaim of MADV_FREE pages and anon/file pages, while the patches always reclaim MADV_FREE pages first if there are. I described the reason in patch 5.
For the third issue, we can add a separate RSS count for MADV_FREE pages. The count will be increased in madvise syscall and decreased in page reclaim (eg, unmap). One issue is activate_page(). A MADV_FREE page can be promoted to active page there. But there isn't mm_struct context at that place. Iterating vma there sounds too silly. The patchset don't fix this issue yet. Hopefully somebody can share a hint how to fix this issue.
Thanks,
Shaohua
Minchan previous patches:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144800657002763&w=2
Shaohua Li (6):
mm: add wrap for page accouting index
mm: add lazyfree page flag
mm: add LRU_LAZYFREE lru list
mm: move MADV_FREE pages into LRU_LAZYFREE list
mm: reclaim lazyfree pages
mm: enable MADV_FREE for swapless system
drivers/base/node.c | 2 + drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c | 3 +- fs/proc/meminfo.c | 1 + fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 8 ++- include/linux/mm_inline.h | 41 +++++++++++++ include/linux/mmzone.h | 9 +++ include/linux/page-flags.h | 6 ++ include/linux/swap.h | 2 +- include/linux/vm_event_item.h | 2 +- include/trace/events/mmflags.h | 1 + include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 31 +++++----- kernel/power/snapshot.c | 1 + mm/compaction.c | 11 ++-- mm/huge_memory.c | 6 +- mm/khugepaged.c | 6 +- mm/madvise.c | 11 +--- mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++ mm/memory-failure.c | 3 +- mm/memory_hotplug.c | 3 +- mm/mempolicy.c | 3 +- mm/migrate.c | 29 ++++------ mm/page_alloc.c | 10 ++++ mm/rmap.c | 7 ++- mm/swap.c | 51 +++++++++------- mm/vmscan.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- mm/vmstat.c | 4 ++ 26 files changed, 242 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 1/6 mm: add wrap for page accouting index
We calculate page/lru accouting index with checking if the page/lru is file. This will be a problem when we introduce a new LRU list. So add a wrap for the calculation.
The patch is based on Minchan's previous patch.
--- include/linux/mm_inline.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 23 ++++++++++++----------- mm/compaction.c | 3 +-- mm/khugepaged.c | 6 ++---- mm/memory-failure.c | 3 +-- mm/memory_hotplug.c | 3 +-- mm/mempolicy.c | 3 +-- mm/migrate.c | 27 +++++++++------------------ mm/vmscan.c | 19 ++++++++++--------- 9 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
include/linux/mm_inline.h +26 -0
@@ -124,6 +124,32 @@ static __always_inline enum lru_list page_lru(struct page *page) return lru; } +/* +* lru_isolate_index - which item should a lru be accounted for +* @lru: the lru list +* +* Returns the accounting item index of the lru +*/ +static inline int lru_isolate_index (enum lru_list lru) +{ +if (lru ==LRU_INACTIVE_FILE || lru ==LRU_ACTIVE_FILE ) +return NR_ISOLATED_FILE ; +return NR_ISOLATED_ANON ; +} + +/* +* page_isolate_index - which item should a page be accounted for +* @page: the page to test +* +* Returns the accounting item index of the page +*/ +static inline int page_isolate_index (struct page *page) +{ +if (!PageSwapBacked (page)) +return NR_ISOLATED_FILE ; +return NR_ISOLATED_ANON ; +} +#define lru_to_page (head) (list_entry((head)->prev, struct page, lru))#endif
include/trace/events/vmscan.h +12 -11
@@ -31,9 +31,10 @@ (RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC) \ ) -#define trace_shrink_flags (file) \ +#define trace_shrink_flags (isolate_index) \ ( \ - (file ? RECLAIM_WB_FILE : RECLAIM_WB_ANON) | \ + (isolate_index == NR_ISOLATED_FILE ? RECLAIM_WB_FILE : \ + RECLAIM_WB_ANON) | \ (RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC) \ )
@@ -345,11 +346,11 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive, unsigned long nr_congested, unsigned long nr_immediate, unsigned long nr_activate, unsigned long nr_ref_keep, unsigned long nr_unmap_fail, - int priority, int file), + int priority, int isolate_index),TP_ARGS (nid ,nr_scanned ,nr_reclaimed ,nr_dirty ,nr_writeback ,nr_congested ,nr_immediate ,nr_activate ,nr_ref_keep , -nr_unmap_fail ,priority ,file ), +nr_unmap_fail ,priority ,isolate_index ),TP_STRUCT__entry ( __field(int, nid)
@@ -378,7 +379,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive, __entry->nr_ref_keep = nr_ref_keep; __entry->nr_unmap_fail = nr_unmap_fail; __entry->priority = priority; - __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (file); + __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (isolate_index); ), TP_printk("nid=%d nr_scanned=%ld nr_reclaimed=%ld nr_dirty=%ld nr_writeback=%ld nr_congested=%ld nr_immediate=%ld nr_activate=%ld nr_ref_keep=%ld nr_unmap_fail=%ld priority=%d flags=%s",
@@ -395,9 +396,9 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active, TP_PROTO(int nid, unsigned long nr_taken, unsigned long nr_active, unsigned long nr_deactivated, - unsigned long nr_referenced, int priority, int file), + unsigned long nr_referenced, int priority, int isolate_index), -TP_ARGS (nid, nr_taken, nr_active, nr_deactivated, nr_referenced, priority, file), +TP_ARGS (nid, nr_taken, nr_active, nr_deactivated, nr_referenced, priority, isolate_index),TP_STRUCT__entry ( __field(int, nid)
@@ -416,7 +417,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active, __entry->nr_deactivated = nr_deactivated; __entry->nr_referenced = nr_referenced; __entry->priority = priority; - __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (file); + __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (isolate_index); ), TP_printk("nid=%d nr_taken=%ld nr_active=%ld nr_deactivated=%ld nr_referenced=%ld priority=%d flags=%s",
@@ -432,9 +433,9 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_inactive_list_is_low, TP_PROTO(int nid, int reclaim_idx, unsigned long total_inactive, unsigned long inactive, unsigned long total_active, unsigned long active, - unsigned long ratio, int file), + unsigned long ratio, int isolate_index), -TP_ARGS (nid, reclaim_idx, total_inactive, inactive, total_active, active, ratio, file), +TP_ARGS (nid, reclaim_idx, total_inactive, inactive, total_active, active, ratio, isolate_index),TP_STRUCT__entry ( __field(int, nid)
@@ -455,7 +456,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_inactive_list_is_low, __entry->total_active = total_active; __entry->active = active; __entry->ratio = ratio; - __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (file) &RECLAIM_WB_LRU ; + __entry->reclaim_flags =trace_shrink_flags (isolate_index) &RECLAIM_WB_LRU ; ), TP_printk("nid=%d reclaim_idx=%d total_inactive=%ld inactive=%ld total_active=%ld active=%ld ratio=%ld flags=%s",
mm/compaction.c +1 -2
@@ -857,8 +857,7 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,/* Successfully isolated */ del_page_from_lru_list (page, lruvec,page_lru (page)); -inc_node_page_state (page, -NR_ISOLATED_ANON +page_is_file_cache (page)); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); isolate_success:list_add (&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
mm/khugepaged.c +2 -4
@@ -481,8 +481,7 @@ void __khugepaged_exit(struct mm_struct *mm)static void release_pte_page (struct page *page) { -/* 0 stands for page_is_file_cache(page) == false */ -dec_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON +0 ); +dec_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page));unlock_page (page);putback_lru_page (page); }
@@ -577,8 +576,7 @@ static int __collapse_huge_page_isolate(struct vm_area_struct *vma, result =SCAN_DEL_PAGE_LRU ; goto out; } -/* 0 stands for page_is_file_cache(page) == false */ -inc_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON +0 ); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page));VM_BUG_ON_PAGE (!PageLocked (page), page);VM_BUG_ON_PAGE (PageLRU (page), page);
mm/memory-failure.c +1 -2
@@ -1667,8 +1667,7 @@ static int __soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags)* cannot have PAGE_MAPPING_MOVABLE. */ if (!__PageMovable (page)) -inc_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page));list_add (&page->lru, &pagelist); ret =migrate_pages (&pagelist, new_page,NULL ,MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL ,MIGRATE_SYNC ,MR_MEMORY_FAILURE );
mm/memory_hotplug.c +1 -2
@@ -1620,8 +1620,7 @@ do_migrate_range(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)put_page (page);list_add_tail (&page->lru, &source); move_pages--; -inc_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); }else {#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
mm/mempolicy.c +1 -2
@@ -964,8 +964,7 @@ static void migrate_page_add(struct page *page, struct list_head *pagelist,if ((flags &MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL ) ||page_mapcount (page) ==1 ) {if (!isolate_lru_page (page)) {list_add_tail (&page->lru, pagelist); -inc_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); } } }
mm/migrate.c +9 -18
@@ -184,8 +184,7 @@ void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)put_page (page); }else {putback_lru_page (page); -dec_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +dec_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); } } }
@@ -1130,8 +1129,7 @@ static ICE_noinline int unmap_and_move(new_page_t get_new_page,* as __PageMovable */ if (likely (!__PageMovable (page))) -dec_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +dec_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); }/*
@@ -1471,8 +1469,7 @@ static int do_move_page_to_node_array(struct mm_struct *mm, err =isolate_lru_page (page);if (!err) {list_add_tail (&page->lru, &pagelist); -inc_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +inc_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page)); } put_and_set:/*
@@ -1816,8 +1813,6 @@ static bool numamigrate_update_ratelimit(pg_data_t *pgdat,static int numamigrate_isolate_page (pg_data_t *pgdat,struct page *page) { -int page_lru; -VM_BUG_ON_PAGE (compound_order (page) && !PageTransHuge (page), page);/* Avoid migrating to a node that is nearly full */
@@ -1839,8 +1834,7 @@ static int numamigrate_isolate_page(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page)return 0 ; } - page_lru =page_is_file_cache (page); -mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page),NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_lru, +mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page),page_isolate_index (page),hpage_nr_pages (page));/*
@@ -1898,8 +1892,7 @@ int migrate_misplaced_page(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,if (nr_remaining) {if (!list_empty (&migratepages)) {list_del (&page->lru); -dec_node_page_state (page,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + -page_is_file_cache (page)); +dec_node_page_state (page,page_isolate_index (page));putback_lru_page (page); } isolated =0 ;
@@ -1929,7 +1922,7 @@ int migrate_misplaced_transhuge_page(struct mm_struct *mm,pg_data_t *pgdat =NODE_DATA (node);int isolated =0 ;struct page *new_page =NULL ; -int page_lru =page_is_file_cache (page); +int isolate_index =page_isolate_index (page);unsigned long mmun_start = address &HPAGE_PMD_MASK ;unsigned long mmun_end = mmun_start +HPAGE_PMD_SIZE ;pmd_t orig_entry;
@@ -1991,8 +1984,8 @@ int migrate_misplaced_transhuge_page(struct mm_struct *mm,/* Retake the callers reference and putback on LRU */ get_page (page);putback_lru_page (page); -mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page), -NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_lru, -HPAGE_PMD_NR ); +mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page), isolate_index, + -HPAGE_PMD_NR ); goto out_unlock; }
@@ -2042,9 +2035,7 @@ int migrate_misplaced_transhuge_page(struct mm_struct *mm,count_vm_events (PGMIGRATE_SUCCESS ,HPAGE_PMD_NR );count_vm_numa_events (NUMA_PAGE_MIGRATE ,HPAGE_PMD_NR ); -mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page), -NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_lru, - -HPAGE_PMD_NR ); +mod_node_page_state (page_pgdat (page), isolate_index, -HPAGE_PMD_NR );return isolated; out_fail:
mm/vmscan.c +10 -9
@@ -1736,7 +1736,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, nr_taken =isolate_lru_pages (nr_to_scan, lruvec, &page_list, &nr_scanned, sc, isolate_mode, lru); -__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, nr_taken); +__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,lru_isolate_index (lru), nr_taken); reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[file] += nr_taken;if (global_reclaim (sc)) {
@@ -1765,7 +1765,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,putback_inactive_pages (lruvec, &page_list); -__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, -nr_taken); +__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,lru_isolate_index (lru), -nr_taken);spin_unlock_irq (&pgdat->lru_lock);
@@ -1843,7 +1843,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, stat.nr_congested, stat.nr_immediate, stat.nr_activate, stat.nr_ref_keep, stat.nr_unmap_fail, - sc->priority, file); + sc->priority, lru_isolate_index(lru));return nr_reclaimed; }
@@ -1940,7 +1940,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, nr_taken =isolate_lru_pages (nr_to_scan, lruvec, &l_hold, &nr_scanned, sc, isolate_mode, lru); -__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, nr_taken); +__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,lru_isolate_index (lru), nr_taken); reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[file] += nr_taken;if (global_reclaim (sc))
@@ -2003,13 +2003,13 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, nr_activate =move_active_pages_to_lru (lruvec, &l_active, &l_hold, lru); nr_deactivate =move_active_pages_to_lru (lruvec, &l_inactive, &l_hold, lru -LRU_ACTIVE ); -__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON + file, -nr_taken); +__mod_node_page_state (pgdat,lru_isolate_index (lru), -nr_taken);spin_unlock_irq (&pgdat->lru_lock);mem_cgroup_uncharge_list (&l_hold);free_hot_cold_page_list (&l_hold, true);trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active (pgdat->node_id, nr_taken, nr_activate, - nr_deactivate, nr_rotated, sc->priority, file); + nr_deactivate, nr_rotated, sc->priority,lru_isolate_index (lru)); }/*
@@ -2038,11 +2038,12 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan,* 1TB 101 10GB * 10TB 320 32GB */ -static bool inactive_list_is_low (struct lruvec *lruvec,bool file, +static bool inactive_list_is_low (struct lruvec *lruvec,enum lru_list lru,struct scan_control *sc,bool trace) {unsigned long inactive_ratio;unsigned long inactive, active; +bool file =is_file_lru (lru);enum lru_list inactive_lru = file *LRU_FILE ;enum lru_list active_lru = file *LRU_FILE +LRU_ACTIVE ;unsigned long gb;
@@ -2068,7 +2069,7 @@ static bool inactive_list_is_low(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool file, sc->reclaim_idx,lruvec_lru_size (lruvec, inactive_lru,MAX_NR_ZONES ), inactive,lruvec_lru_size (lruvec, active_lru,MAX_NR_ZONES ), active, - inactive_ratio, file); + inactive_ratio, lru_isolate_index(lru));return inactive * inactive_ratio < active; }
@@ -2077,7 +2078,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_list(enum lru_list lru, unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc) { if (is_active_lru(lru)) { - if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, is_file_lru(lru), sc, true)) + if (inactive_list_is_low(lruvec, lru, sc, true)) shrink_active_list(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, lru);return 0 ; }
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 2/6 mm: add lazyfree page flag
In reply to Shaohua LiWe are going to add MADV_FREE pages into a new LRU list. Add a new flag to indicate such pages. Note, we are reusing PG_mappedtodisk for the new flag. This is ok because no anonymous pages have this flag set.
The patch is based on Minchan's previous patch.
--- fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 8 +++++++- include/linux/mm_inline.h | 5 +++++ include/linux/page-flags.h | 6 ++++++ mm/huge_memory.c | 1 + mm/migrate.c | 2 ++ 5 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
fs/proc/task_mmu.c +7 -1
@@ -440,6 +440,7 @@ struct mem_size_stats {unsigned long private_dirty;unsigned long referenced;unsigned long anonymous; +unsigned long lazyfree;unsigned long anonymous_thp;unsigned long shmem_thp;unsigned long swap;
@@ -456,8 +457,11 @@ static void smaps_account(struct mem_size_stats *mss, struct page *page,int i, nr = compound ?1 <<compound_order (page) :1 ;unsigned long size = nr *PAGE_SIZE ; -if (PageAnon (page)) +if (PageAnon (page)) { mss->anonymous += size; +if (PageLazyFree (page)) + mss->lazyfree += size; + } mss->resident += size;/* Accumulate the size in pages that have been accessed. */
@@ -770,6 +774,7 @@ static int show_smap(struct seq_file *m, void *v, int is_pid)"Private_Dirty: %8lu kB\n" "Referenced: %8lu kB\n" "Anonymous: %8lu kB\n" +"LazyFree: %8lu kB\n" "AnonHugePages: %8lu kB\n" "ShmemPmdMapped: %8lu kB\n" "Shared_Hugetlb: %8lu kB\n"
@@ -788,6 +793,7 @@ static int show_smap(struct seq_file *m, void *v, int is_pid) mss.private_dirty >>10 , mss.referenced >>10 , mss.anonymous >>10 , + mss.lazyfree >>10 , mss.anonymous_thp >>10 , mss.shmem_thp >>10 , mss.shared_hugetlb >> 10,
include/linux/mm_inline.h +5 -0
@@ -22,6 +22,11 @@ static inline int page_is_file_cache(struct page *page)return !PageSwapBacked (page); } +static inline bool page_is_lazyfree (struct page *page) +{ +return PageSwapBacked (page) &&PageLazyFree (page); +} + static __always_inline void __update_lru_size(struct lruvec *lruvec,enum lru_list lru,enum zone_type zid,int nr_pages)
include/linux/page-flags.h +6 -0
@@ -107,6 +107,9 @@ enum pageflags {#endif __NR_PAGEFLAGS, +/* MADV_FREE */ + PG_lazyfree = PG_mappedtodisk, +/* Filesystems */ PG_checked = PG_owner_priv_1,
@@ -428,6 +431,9 @@ TESTPAGEFLAG_FALSE(Ksm)u64 stable_page_flags (struct page *page); +PAGEFLAG(LazyFree, lazyfree, PF_ANY) + __CLEARPAGEFLAG(LazyFree, lazyfree, PF_ANY) +static inline int PageUptodate (struct page *page) {int ret;
mm/huge_memory.c +1 -0
@@ -1918,6 +1918,7 @@ static void __split_huge_page_tail(struct page *head, int tail, (1L << PG_swapbacked) | (1L << PG_mlocked) | (1L << PG_uptodate) | + (1L << PG_lazyfree) | (1L << PG_active) | (1L << PG_locked) | (1L << PG_unevictable) |
mm/migrate.c +2 -0
@@ -641,6 +641,8 @@ void migrate_page_copy(struct page *newpage, struct page *page)SetPageChecked (newpage);if (PageMappedToDisk (page))SetPageMappedToDisk (newpage); +if (PageLazyFree (page)) +SetPageLazyFree (newpage);/* Move dirty on pages not done by migrate_page_move_mapping() */ if (PageDirty (page))
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 3/6 mm: add LRU_LAZYFREE lru list
In reply to Shaohua LiMADV_FREE pages are in anonymous LRU list currently, there are several problems:
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And since MADV_FREE pages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaim MADV_FREE pages
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for MADV_FREE pages, because those pages could be freed easily with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, because MADV_FREE pages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim a MADV_FREE page, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient.
Introducing a new LRU list for MADV_FREE pages could solve the issues. If only MADV_FREE pages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages.
This patch adds a LRU_LAZYFREE lru list. It's a dedicated LRU list for MADV_FREE pages.
The patch is based on Minchan's previous patch.
--- drivers/base/node.c | 2 ++ drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c | 3 ++- fs/proc/meminfo.c | 1 + include/linux/mm_inline.h | 10 ++++++++++ include/linux/mmzone.h | 9 +++++++++ include/linux/vm_event_item.h | 2 +- include/trace/events/mmflags.h | 1 + include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 10 +++++++--- kernel/power/snapshot.c | 1 + mm/compaction.c | 8 +++++--- mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++++ mm/page_alloc.c | 10 ++++++++++ mm/vmscan.c | 21 ++++++++++++++------- mm/vmstat.c | 4 ++++ 14 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
drivers/base/node.c +2 -0
@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ static ssize_t node_read_meminfo(struct device *dev,"Node %d Inactive(anon): %8lu kB\n" "Node %d Active(file): %8lu kB\n" "Node %d Inactive(file): %8lu kB\n" +"Node %d LazyFree: %8lu kB\n" "Node %d Unevictable: %8lu kB\n" "Node %d Mlocked: %8lu kB\n" , nid, K(i.totalram),
@@ -83,6 +84,7 @@ static ssize_t node_read_meminfo(struct device *dev, nid,K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_ANON )), nid,K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ACTIVE_FILE )), nid,K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE )), + nid,K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE )), nid,K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_UNEVICTABLE )), nid, K(sum_zone_node_page_state(nid, NR_MLOCK)));
drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c +2 -1
@@ -75,7 +75,8 @@ static unsigned long lowmem_count(struct shrinker *s,return global_node_page_state (NR_ACTIVE_ANON ) +global_node_page_state (NR_ACTIVE_FILE ) +global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_ANON ) + -global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_FILE ); +global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_FILE ) + +global_node_page_state (NR_LAZYFREE ); }static unsigned long lowmem_scan (struct shrinker *s,struct shrink_control *sc)
fs/proc/meminfo.c +1 -0
@@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)show_val_kb (m,"Inactive(anon): " , pages[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON ]);show_val_kb (m,"Active(file): " , pages[LRU_ACTIVE_FILE ]);show_val_kb (m,"Inactive(file): " , pages[LRU_INACTIVE_FILE ]); +show_val_kb (m,"LazyFree: " , pages[LRU_LAZYFREE ]);show_val_kb (m,"Unevictable: " , pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE ]);show_val_kb (m,"Mlocked: " ,global_page_state (NR_MLOCK ));
include/linux/mm_inline.h +10 -0
@@ -81,6 +81,8 @@ static inline enum lru_list page_lru_base_type(struct page *page) {if (page_is_file_cache (page))return LRU_INACTIVE_FILE ; +if (PageLazyFree (page)) +return LRU_LAZYFREE ;return LRU_INACTIVE_ANON ; }
@@ -100,6 +102,8 @@ static __always_inline enum lru_list page_off_lru(struct page *page) lru =LRU_UNEVICTABLE ; }else { lru =page_lru_base_type (page); +if (lru ==LRU_LAZYFREE ) +__ClearPageLazyFree (page);if (PageActive (page)) {__ClearPageActive (page); lru +=LRU_ACTIVE ;
@@ -123,6 +127,8 @@ static __always_inline enum lru_list page_lru(struct page *page) lru =LRU_UNEVICTABLE ; else { lru =page_lru_base_type (page); +if (lru ==LRU_LAZYFREE ) +return lru;if (PageActive (page)) lru +=LRU_ACTIVE ; }
@@ -139,6 +145,8 @@ static inline int lru_isolate_index(enum lru_list lru) {if (lru ==LRU_INACTIVE_FILE || lru ==LRU_ACTIVE_FILE )return NR_ISOLATED_FILE ; +if (lru ==LRU_LAZYFREE ) +return NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ;return NR_ISOLATED_ANON ; }
@@ -152,6 +160,8 @@ static inline int page_isolate_index(struct page *page) {if (!PageSwapBacked (page))return NR_ISOLATED_FILE ; +else if (PageLazyFree (page)) +return NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ;return NR_ISOLATED_ANON ; }
include/linux/mmzone.h +9 -0
@@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ enum zone_stat_item {NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_ANON ,NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_FILE ,NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_FILE , +NR_ZONE_LAZYFREE ,NR_ZONE_UNEVICTABLE ,NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING ,/* Count of dirty, writeback and unstable pages */ NR_MLOCK, /* mlock()ed pages found and moved off LRU */
@@ -146,9 +147,11 @@ enum node_stat_item {NR_ACTIVE_ANON ,/* " " " " " */ NR_INACTIVE_FILE ,/* " " " " " */ NR_ACTIVE_FILE ,/* " " " " " */ +NR_LAZYFREE ,/* " " " " " */ NR_UNEVICTABLE ,/* " " " " " */ NR_ISOLATED_ANON ,/* Temporary isolated pages from anon lru */ NR_ISOLATED_FILE ,/* Temporary isolated pages from file lru */ +NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ,/* Temporary isolated pages from lazyfree lru */ NR_PAGES_SCANNED ,/* pages scanned since last reclaim */ WORKINGSET_REFAULT , WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE,
@@ -190,6 +193,7 @@ enum lru_list {LRU_ACTIVE_ANON =LRU_BASE +LRU_ACTIVE ,LRU_INACTIVE_FILE =LRU_BASE +LRU_FILE ,LRU_ACTIVE_FILE =LRU_BASE +LRU_FILE +LRU_ACTIVE , +LRU_LAZYFREE ,LRU_UNEVICTABLE , NR_LRU_LISTS };
@@ -203,6 +207,11 @@ static inline int is_file_lru(enum lru_list lru)return (lru ==LRU_INACTIVE_FILE || lru ==LRU_ACTIVE_FILE ); } +static inline int is_anon_lru (enum lru_list lru) +{ +return lru <=LRU_ACTIVE_ANON ; +} +static inline int is_active_lru (enum lru_list lru) {return (lru ==LRU_ACTIVE_ANON || lru ==LRU_ACTIVE_FILE );
include/linux/vm_event_item.h +1 -1
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ enum vm_event_item { PGPGIN, PGPGOUT, PSWPIN, PSWPOUT,FOR_ALL_ZONES (PGALLOC ),FOR_ALL_ZONES (ALLOCSTALL ),FOR_ALL_ZONES (PGSCAN_SKIP ), -PGFREE ,PGACTIVATE ,PGDEACTIVATE , +PGFREE ,PGACTIVATE ,PGDEACTIVATE ,PGLAZYFREE ,PGFAULT ,PGMAJFAULT ,PGLAZYFREED , PGREFILL,
include/trace/events/mmflags.h +1 -0
@@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ IF_HAVE_VM_SOFTDIRTY(VM_SOFTDIRTY, "softdirty" ) \EM (LRU_ACTIVE_ANON ,"active_anon" ) \ EM (LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, "inactive_file") \ EM (LRU_ACTIVE_FILE, "active_file") \ + EM (LRU_LAZYFREE, "lazyfree") \EMe (LRU_UNEVICTABLE ,"unevictable" )/*
include/trace/events/vmscan.h +7 -3
@@ -12,8 +12,9 @@#define RECLAIM_WB_ANON 0x0001u#define RECLAIM_WB_FILE 0x0002u +#define RECLAIM_WB_LAZYFREE 0x0004u#define RECLAIM_WB_MIXED 0x0010u -#define RECLAIM_WB_SYNC 0x0004u/* Unused, all reclaim async */ +#define RECLAIM_WB_SYNC 0x0020u/* Unused, all reclaim async */ #define RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC 0x0008u#define RECLAIM_WB_LRU (RECLAIM_WB_ANON|RECLAIM_WB_FILE)
@@ -21,20 +22,23 @@ (flags) ?__print_flags (flags,"|" , \ {RECLAIM_WB_ANON, "RECLAIM_WB_ANON"}, \ {RECLAIM_WB_FILE, "RECLAIM_WB_FILE"}, \ + {RECLAIM_WB_LAZYFREE, "RECLAIM_WB_LAZYFREE"}, \ {RECLAIM_WB_MIXED, "RECLAIM_WB_MIXED"}, \ {RECLAIM_WB_SYNC, "RECLAIM_WB_SYNC"}, \ {RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC, "RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC"} \ ) : "RECLAIM_WB_NONE"#define trace_reclaim_flags (page) ( \ - (page_is_file_cache(page) ? RECLAIM_WB_FILE : RECLAIM_WB_ANON) | \ + (page_is_file_cache(page) ? RECLAIM_WB_FILE : \ + PageLazyFree(page) ? RECLAIM_WB_LAZYFREE : RECLAIM_WB_ANON) | \ (RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC) \ )#define trace_shrink_flags (isolate_index) \ ( \ (isolate_index == NR_ISOLATED_FILE ? RECLAIM_WB_FILE : \ - RECLAIM_WB_ANON) | \ + isolate_index == NR_ISOLATED_ANON ? RECLAIM_WB_ANON: \ + RECLAIM_WB_LAZYFREE) | \ (RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC) \ )
kernel/power/snapshot.c +1 -0
@@ -1653,6 +1653,7 @@ static unsigned long minimum_image_size(unsigned long saveable) +global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_ANON ) +global_node_page_state (NR_ACTIVE_FILE ) +global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_FILE ) + +global_node_page_state (NR_LAZYFREE ) -global_node_page_state (NR_FILE_MAPPED );return saveable <= size ?0 : saveable - size;
mm/compaction.c +5 -3
@@ -637,16 +637,18 @@ isolate_freepages_range(struct compact_control *cc,/* Similar to reclaim, but different enough that they don't share logic */ static bool too_many_isolated (struct zone *zone) { -unsigned long active, inactive, isolated; +unsigned long active, inactive, lazyfree, isolated; inactive =node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE ) +node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_ANON ); active =node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ACTIVE_FILE ) +node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ACTIVE_ANON ); + lazyfree =node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE ); isolated =node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_FILE ) + -node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON ); +node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON ) + +node_page_state (zone->zone_pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ); -return isolated > (inactive + active) /2 ; +return isolated > (inactive + active + lazyfree) /2 ; }/**
mm/memcontrol.c +4 -0
@@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ static const char * const mem_cgroup_lru_names[] = {"active_anon" ,"inactive_file" ,"active_file" , +"lazyfree" , "unevictable", };
@@ -1263,6 +1264,8 @@ static bool mem_cgroup_out_of_memory(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,static bool test_mem_cgroup_node_reclaimable (struct mem_cgroup *memcg,int nid,bool noswap) { +if (mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages (memcg, nid,BIT (LRU_LAZYFREE ))) +return true;if (mem_cgroup_node_nr_lru_pages (memcg, nid,LRU_ALL_FILE ))return true;if (noswap || !total_swap_pages)
@@ -3086,6 +3089,7 @@ static int memcg_numa_stat_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v) { "total", LRU_ALL }, { "file", LRU_ALL_FILE }, { "anon", LRU_ALL_ANON }, + { "lazyfree", BIT(LRU_LAZYFREE) }, { "unevictable", BIT(LRU_UNEVICTABLE) }, };const struct numa_stat *stat;
mm/page_alloc.c +10 -0
@@ -4316,6 +4316,9 @@ long si_mem_available(void) pagecache -=min (pagecache /2 , wmark_low); available += pagecache; +/* lazyfree pages can be freed */ + available += pages[LRU_LAZYFREE ]; +/* * Part of the reclaimable slab consists of items that are in use, * and cannot be freed. Cap this estimate at the low watermark.
@@ -4450,6 +4453,7 @@ void show_free_areas(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask)printk ("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n" " active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n" +" lazy_free:%lu isolated_lazy_free:%lu\n" " unevictable:%lu dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu\n" " slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n" " mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n"
@@ -4460,6 +4464,8 @@ void show_free_areas(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask)global_node_page_state (NR_ACTIVE_FILE ),global_node_page_state (NR_INACTIVE_FILE ),global_node_page_state (NR_ISOLATED_FILE ), +global_node_page_state (NR_LAZYFREE ), +global_node_page_state (NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ),global_node_page_state (NR_UNEVICTABLE ),global_node_page_state (NR_FILE_DIRTY ), global_node_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK),
@@ -4483,9 +4489,11 @@ void show_free_areas(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask)" inactive_anon:%lukB" " active_file:%lukB" " inactive_file:%lukB" +" lazy_free:%lukB" " unevictable:%lukB" " isolated(anon):%lukB" " isolated(file):%lukB" +" isolated(lazy_free):%lukB" " mapped:%lukB" " dirty:%lukB" " writeback:%lukB"
@@ -4505,9 +4513,11 @@ void show_free_areas(unsigned int filter, nodemask_t *nodemask)K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_ANON )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ACTIVE_FILE )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE )), +K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_UNEVICTABLE )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_FILE )), +K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_FILE_MAPPED )),K (node_page_state (pgdat,NR_FILE_DIRTY )), K(node_page_state(pgdat, NR_WRITEBACK)),
mm/vmscan.c +14 -7
@@ -205,7 +205,8 @@ unsigned long zone_reclaimable_pages(struct zone *zone)unsigned long nr; nr =zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_FILE ) + -zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_FILE ); +zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_FILE ) + +zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_LAZYFREE );if (get_nr_swap_pages () >0 ) nr +=zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_INACTIVE_ANON ) +zone_page_state_snapshot (zone,NR_ZONE_ACTIVE_ANON );
@@ -219,7 +220,9 @@ unsigned long pgdat_reclaimable_pages(struct pglist_data *pgdat) nr =node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_ACTIVE_FILE ) +node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE ) + -node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_FILE ); +node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_FILE ) + +node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE ) + +node_page_state_snapshot (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE );if (get_nr_swap_pages () >0 ) nr += node_page_state_snapshot(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_ANON) +
@@ -1602,7 +1605,7 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)* the LRU list will go small and be scanned faster than necessary, leading to * unnecessary swapping, thrashing and OOM. */ -static int too_many_isolated (struct pglist_data *pgdat,int file, +static int too_many_isolated (struct pglist_data *pgdat,enum lru_list lru,struct scan_control *sc) {unsigned long inactive, isolated;
@@ -1613,12 +1616,15 @@ static int too_many_isolated(struct pglist_data *pgdat, int file,if (!sane_reclaim (sc))return 0 ; -if (file) { +if (is_file_lru (lru)) { inactive =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE ); isolated =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_FILE ); - }else { + }else if (is_anon_lru (lru)) { inactive =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_ANON ); isolated =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_ANON ); + }else { + inactive =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE ); + isolated =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_ISOLATED_LAZYFREE ); }/*
@@ -1718,7 +1724,7 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,struct pglist_data *pgdat =lruvec_pgdat (lruvec);struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = &lruvec->reclaim_stat; -while (unlikely (too_many_isolated (pgdat, file, sc))) { +while (unlikely (too_many_isolated (pgdat, lru, sc))) {congestion_wait (BLK_RW_ASYNC ,HZ /10 );/* We are about to die and free our memory. Return now. */
@@ -2498,7 +2504,8 @@ static inline bool should_continue_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat,* inactive lists are large enough, continue reclaiming */ pages_for_compaction =compact_gap (sc->order); - inactive_lru_pages =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE ); + inactive_lru_pages =node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_FILE ) + +node_page_state (pgdat,NR_LAZYFREE );if (get_nr_swap_pages () >0 ) inactive_lru_pages +=node_page_state (pgdat,NR_INACTIVE_ANON ); if (sc->nr_reclaimed < pages_for_compaction &&
mm/vmstat.c +4 -0
@@ -925,6 +925,7 @@ const char * const vmstat_text[] = {"nr_zone_active_anon" ,"nr_zone_inactive_file" ,"nr_zone_active_file" , +"nr_zone_lazyfree" ,"nr_zone_unevictable" ,"nr_zone_write_pending" , "nr_mlock",
@@ -951,9 +952,11 @@ const char * const vmstat_text[] = {"nr_active_anon" ,"nr_inactive_file" ,"nr_active_file" , +"nr_lazyfree" ,"nr_unevictable" ,"nr_isolated_anon" ,"nr_isolated_file" , +"nr_isolated_lazyfree" ,"nr_pages_scanned" ,"workingset_refault" , "workingset_activate",
@@ -992,6 +995,7 @@ const char * const vmstat_text[] = {"pgfree" ,"pgactivate" ,"pgdeactivate" , +"pglazyfree" ,"pgfault" , "pgmajfault",
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 4/6 mm: move MADV_FREE pages into LRU_LAZYFREE list
In reply to Shaohua LiMove the MADV_FREE pages into LRU_LAZYFREE list. The reason why we need to do this is described in last patch. Next patch will reclaim the pages.
The patch is based on Minchan's previous patch.
--- include/linux/swap.h | 2 +- mm/huge_memory.c | 5 ++--- mm/madvise.c | 3 +-- mm/swap.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
include/linux/swap.h +1 -1
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ extern void lru_add_drain_cpu(int cpu);extern void lru_add_drain_all (void );extern void rotate_reclaimable_page (struct page *page);extern void deactivate_file_page (struct page *page); -extern void deactivate_page (struct page *page); +extern void move_page_to_lazyfree_list (struct page *page);extern void swap_setup (void );extern void add_page_to_unevictable_list (struct page *page);
mm/huge_memory.c +2 -3
@@ -1391,9 +1391,6 @@ bool madvise_free_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,ClearPageDirty (page);unlock_page (page); -if (PageActive (page)) -deactivate_page (page); -if (pmd_young (orig_pmd) ||pmd_dirty (orig_pmd)) { orig_pmd =pmdp_huge_get_and_clear_full (tlb->mm, addr, pmd, tlb->fullmm);
@@ -1404,6 +1401,8 @@ bool madvise_free_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,set_pmd_at (mm, addr, pmd, orig_pmd);tlb_remove_pmd_tlb_entry (tlb, pmd, addr); } + +move_page_to_lazyfree_list (page); ret = true; out:spin_unlock (ptl);
mm/madvise.c +1 -2
@@ -378,10 +378,9 @@ static int madvise_free_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, ptent =pte_mkclean (ptent); ptent =pte_wrprotect (ptent);set_pte_at (mm, addr, pte, ptent); -if (PageActive (page)) -deactivate_page (page);tlb_remove_tlb_entry (tlb, pte, addr); } +move_page_to_lazyfree_list (page); } out:if (nr_swap) {
mm/swap.c +29 -22
106 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 5/6 mm: reclaim lazyfree pages
In reply to Shaohua LiWhen memory pressure is high, we must free lazyfree pages. If we free lazyfree pages, the cost reaccessing the pages is a page fault and page allocation. The cost is much lower than swapin a page or refill a file page cache because refilling anon/file page includes the same cost plus extra IO cost, which is very high.
The policy to determine when to free lazyfree pages is controversial. Some think lazyfree pages should be reclaimed first before any other anon/file pages, because userspace already indicates the pages are not important at all and the cost to refill lazyfree pages is much lower than refilling anon/file page cache. Others think userspace could still use the MADV_FREE pages otherwise userspace will directly use MADV_DISCARD to free the pages. If page cache won't be used again, there is no refill cost for page cache and thus in this case reclaiming MADV_FREE pages doesn't make sense because refill MADV_FREE pages still has cost.
This patch doesn't choose the latter. It's possible released page cache never gets refilled, but the opposite case could happen very likely too. Considering the refill cost of file/anon pages is much higher than refill cost of MADV_FREE pages, it doesn't make sense to retain lazyfree pages.
For the implementation, this is targeted for swapless system, so we don't allocate a swap entry for lazyfree pages. If the pages can't be reclaimed directly, they are put back into anon lru list and reclaimed in normal way.
--- mm/rmap.c | 7 ++++++- mm/vmscan.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
mm/rmap.c +6 -1
@@ -1546,13 +1546,18 @@ static int try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,* Store the swap location in the pte. * See handle_pte_fault() ... */ -VM_BUG_ON_PAGE (!PageSwapCache (page), page); +VM_BUG_ON_PAGE (!PageSwapCache (page) && !PageLazyFree (page), + page);if (!PageDirty (page) && (flags &TTU_LZFREE )) {/* It's a freeable page by MADV_FREE */ dec_mm_counter (mm,MM_ANONPAGES ); rp->lazyfreed++; goto discard; + }else if (flags &TTU_LZFREE ) { +set_pte_at (mm, address, pte, pteval); + ret =SWAP_FAIL ; + goto out_unmap; }if (swap_duplicate (entry) <0 ) {
mm/vmscan.c +48 -8
149 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
RFC 6/6 mm: enable MADV_FREE for swapless system
In reply to Shaohua LiNow MADV_FREE pages can be easily reclaimed even for swapless system. We can safely enable MADV_FREE for all systems.
--- mm/madvise.c | 8 +------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
mm/madvise.c +1 -7
@@ -579,13 +579,7 @@ madvise_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_area_struct **prev,case MADV_WILLNEED :return madvise_willneed (vma, prev, start, end);case MADV_FREE : -/* -* XXX: In this implementation, MADV_FREE works like -* MADV_DONTNEED on swapless system or full swap. -*/ -if (get_nr_swap_pages () >0 ) -return madvise_free (vma, prev, start, end); -/* passthrough */ +return madvise_free (vma, prev, start, end);case MADV_DONTNEED :return madvise_dontneed (vma, prev, start, end);default :
Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Johannes Weiner
maintainerHi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.
Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.
Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.
Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their PG_swapbacked flag on MADV_FREE and moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something like clear_page_mlock().
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set PG_swapbacked and goto keep_locked to move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.
Quoted 6 lines
For the third issue, we can add a separate RSS count for
MADV_FREEpages. The count will be increased in madvise syscall and decreased in page reclaim (eg, unmap). One issue isactivate_page(). AMADV_FREEpage can be promoted to active page there. But there isn'tmm_structcontext at that place. Iterating vma there sounds too silly. The patchset don't fix this issue yet. Hopefully somebody can share a hint how to fix this issue.
This problem also goes away if we use the file LRUs.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().
Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the MADV_FREE pages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if the MADV_FREE pages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim the MADV_FREE pages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
For the third issue, we can add a separate RSS count for
MADV_FREEpages. The count will be increased in madvise syscall and decreased in page reclaim (eg, unmap). One issue isactivate_page(). AMADV_FREEpage can be promoted to active page there. But there isn'tmm_structcontext at that place. Iterating vma there sounds too silly. The patchset don't fix this issue yet. Hopefully somebody can share a hint how to fix this issue.This problem also goes away if we use the file LRUs.
Can you elaborate this please? Maybe you mean charge them to MM_FILEPAGES? But that doesn't solve the problem. 'statm' proc file will still report a big RSS.
Thanks,
Shaohua
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Johannes Weiner
maintainerQuoted 39 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.
Quoted 5 lines
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the
MADV_FREEpages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if theMADV_FREEpages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim theMADV_FREEpages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.
The LRU code and the rest of VM already use independent page type distinctions. That's because shmem pages are !PageAnon - they have a page->mapping that points to a real address space, not an anon_vma - but they are swapbacked and thus go through the anon LRU. This would just do the reverse: put PageAnon pages on the file LRU when they don't contain valid data and are thus not swapbacked.
As far as mixing with inactive file pages goes, it'd be possible to link the MADV_FREE pages to the tail of the inactive list, rather than the head. That said, I'm not sure reclaiming use-once filesystem cache before MADV_FREE is such a bad policy. MADV_FREE retains the vmas for the sole purpose of reusing them in the (near) future. That is actually a stronger reuse signal than we have for use-once file pages. If somebody does continuous writes to a logfile or a one-off search through one or more files, we should actually reclaim that cache before we go after MADV_FREE pages that are temporarily invalidated.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
For the third issue, we can add a separate RSS count for
MADV_FREEpages. The count will be increased in madvise syscall and decreased in page reclaim (eg, unmap). One issue isactivate_page(). AMADV_FREEpage can be promoted to active page there. But there isn'tmm_structcontext at that place. Iterating vma there sounds too silly. The patchset don't fix this issue yet. Hopefully somebody can share a hint how to fix this issue.This problem also goes away if we use the file LRUs.
Can you elaborate this please? Maybe you mean charge them to
MM_FILEPAGES? But that doesn't solve the problem. 'statm' proc file will still report a big RSS.
Sorry, I was just referring to the activate_page(). If we use the file LRUs, then page activation has a clear target. And we wouldn't have to adjust any RSS counters when a lazyfreed page is activated.
If we have MM context everywhere else, can we add MM_LAZYPAGES or something and exclude them from MM_ANONPAGES? The total RSS count will still include everything (including mapped clean cache, which is also easily reclaimable btw), but /proc/foo/status could provide a detailed breakdown and allow the user to look at only RssAnon.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Michal Hocko
maintainerQuoted 53 lines · Johannes Weiner
Quoted 39 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.Quoted 5 lines
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the
MADV_FREEpages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if theMADV_FREEpages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim theMADV_FREEpages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.The LRU code and the rest of VM already use independent page type distinctions. That's because shmem pages are !PageAnon - they have a
page->mappingthat points to a real address space, not ananon_vma- but they are swapbacked and thus go through the anon LRU. This would just do the reverse: put PageAnon pages on the file LRU when they don't contain valid data and are thus not swapbacked.
Quoted 9 lines
As far as mixing with inactive file pages goes, it'd be possible to link the
MADV_FREEpages to the tail of the inactive list, rather than the head. That said, I'm not sure reclaiming use-once filesystem cache beforeMADV_FREEis such a bad policy.MADV_FREEretains the vmas for the sole purpose of reusing them in the (near) future. That is actually a stronger reuse signal than we have for use-once file pages. If somebody does continuous writes to a logfile or a one-off search through one or more files, we should actually reclaim that cache before we go afterMADV_FREEpages that are temporarily invalidated.
I completely agree here. LRU_*_FILE will be a bit misnomer (LRU_*CACHE would sound more appropriate). I expect there would be few places which account based on the LRU list but those shouldn't be that hard to fix.
Signature · 8 lines
Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 53 lines · Johannes Weiner
Quoted 39 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.Quoted 5 lines
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the
MADV_FREEpages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if theMADV_FREEpages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim theMADV_FREEpages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.The LRU code and the rest of VM already use independent page type distinctions. That's because shmem pages are !PageAnon - they have a
page->mappingthat points to a real address space, not ananon_vma- but they are swapbacked and thus go through the anon LRU. This would just do the reverse: put PageAnon pages on the file LRU when they don't contain valid data and are thus not swapbacked.
Quoted 9 lines
As far as mixing with inactive file pages goes, it'd be possible to link the
MADV_FREEpages to the tail of the inactive list, rather than the head. That said, I'm not sure reclaiming use-once filesystem cache beforeMADV_FREEis such a bad policy.MADV_FREEretains the vmas for the sole purpose of reusing them in the (near) future. That is actually a stronger reuse signal than we have for use-once file pages. If somebody does continuous writes to a logfile or a one-off search through one or more files, we should actually reclaim that cache before we go afterMADV_FREEpages that are temporarily invalidated.
Thanks, I'll try this idea.
Thanks,
Shaohua
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Hi Johannes,
Quoted 53 lines · Johannes Weiner
Quoted 39 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.Quoted 5 lines
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the
MADV_FREEpages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if theMADV_FREEpages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim theMADV_FREEpages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.The LRU code and the rest of VM already use independent page type distinctions. That's because shmem pages are !PageAnon - they have a
page->mappingthat points to a real address space, not ananon_vma- but they are swapbacked and thus go through the anon LRU. This would just do the reverse: put PageAnon pages on the file LRU when they don't contain valid data and are thus not swapbacked.
Quoted 9 lines
As far as mixing with inactive file pages goes, it'd be possible to link the
MADV_FREEpages to the tail of the inactive list, rather than the head. That said, I'm not sure reclaiming use-once filesystem cache beforeMADV_FREEis such a bad policy.MADV_FREEretains the vmas for the sole purpose of reusing them in the (near) future. That is actually a stronger reuse signal than we have for use-once file pages. If somebody does continuous writes to a logfile or a one-off search through one or more files, we should actually reclaim that cache before we go afterMADV_FREEpages that are temporarily invalidated.
Yes, we should be careful on this issue. It was main arguable point. How about moving them to head of inactive file, not tail if we want to go with inactive file LRU?
With that, VM try to reclaim file pages first from the tail of list and if pages reclaimed were workingset, it could be activated by workingset_refault. Otherwise, we can discard use-once pages without puring *madv_free* pages so I think it's good compromise.
What do you think?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Johannes Weiner
maintainerQuoted 70 lines · Minchan Kim
Hi Johannes,
Quoted 53 lines · Johannes Weiner
Quoted 39 lines · Shaohua Li
Quoted 34 lines · Johannes Weiner
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 8 lines · Shaohua Li
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.Quoted 8 lines
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense for
MADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.Fully agreed, the anon LRU is a bad place for these pages.
Quoted 5 lines
For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.Do we actually need a new page flag and a special LRU for them? These pages are basically like clean cache pages at that point. What do you think about clearing their
PG_swapbackedflag onMADV_FREEand moving them to the inactive file list? The way isolate+putback works should not even need much modification, something likeclear_page_mlock().Quoted 3 lines
When the reclaim scanner finds anon && dirty && !swapbacked, it can again set
PG_swapbackedand gotokeep_lockedto move the page back into the anon LRU to get reclaimed according to swapping rules.Quoted 5 lines
Interesting idea! Not sure though, the
MADV_FREEpages are actually anonymous pages, this will introduce confusion. On the other hand, if theMADV_FREEpages are mixed with inactive file pages, page reclaim need to reclaim a lot of file pages first before reclaim theMADV_FREEpages. This doesn't look good. The point of a separate LRU is to avoid scan other anon/file pages.The LRU code and the rest of VM already use independent page type distinctions. That's because shmem pages are !PageAnon - they have a
page->mappingthat points to a real address space, not ananon_vma- but they are swapbacked and thus go through the anon LRU. This would just do the reverse: put PageAnon pages on the file LRU when they don't contain valid data and are thus not swapbacked.Quoted 9 lines
As far as mixing with inactive file pages goes, it'd be possible to link the
MADV_FREEpages to the tail of the inactive list, rather than the head. That said, I'm not sure reclaiming use-once filesystem cache beforeMADV_FREEis such a bad policy.MADV_FREEretains the vmas for the sole purpose of reusing them in the (near) future. That is actually a stronger reuse signal than we have for use-once file pages. If somebody does continuous writes to a logfile or a one-off search through one or more files, we should actually reclaim that cache before we go afterMADV_FREEpages that are temporarily invalidated.Yes, we should be careful on this issue. It was main arguable point. How about moving them to head of inactive file, not tail if we want to go with inactive file LRU?
Quoted 6 lines
With that, VM try to reclaim file pages first from the tail of list and if pages reclaimed were workingset, it could be activated by
workingset_refault. Otherwise, we can discard use-once pages without puring *madv_free* pages so I think it's good compromise.What do you think?
That's what I tried to say. To address Shaohua's concern in two steps, first, it *would* be possible to move MADV_FREE pages to the tail of the inactive list. But then, taking a step back, I argued that this is probably not be the reclaim policy we actually want.
So I agree with you. I think MADV_FREE should move these pages to the *head* of the inactive cache list, so that we reclaim colder use-once cache first. Workingset detection will make any necessary corrections.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Hi Shaohua,
Quoted 31 lines · Shaohua Li
Hi,
We are trying to use
MADV_FREEin jemalloc. Several issues are found. Without solving the issues, jemalloc can't use theMADV_FREEfeature.
- Doesn't support system without swap enabled. Because if swap is off, we can't or can't efficiently age anonymous pages. And sinceMADV_FREEpages are mixed with other anonymous pages, we can't reclaimMADV_FREEpages. In current implementation,MADV_FREEwill fallback toMADV_DONTNEEDwithout swap enabled. But in our environment, a lot of machines don't enable swap. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREE.
- Increases memory pressure. page reclaim bias file pages reclaim against anonymous pages. This doesn't make sense forMADV_FREEpages, because those pages could be freed easily and refilled with very slight penality. Even page reclaim doesn't bias file pages, there is still an issue, becauseMADV_FREEpages and other anonymous pages are mixed together. To reclaim aMADV_FREEpage, we probably must scan a lot of other anonymous pages, which is inefficient. In our test, we usually see oom withMADV_FREEenabled and nothing without it.
- RSS accounting.MADV_FREEpages are accounted as normal anon pages and reclaimed lazily, so application's RSS becomes bigger. This confuses our workloads. We have monitoring daemon running and if it finds applications' RSS becomes abnormal, the daemon will kill the applications even kernel can reclaim the memory easily. Currently we don't export separate RSS accounting forMADV_FREEpages. This will prevent our setup usingMADV_FREEtoo.For the first two issues, introducing a new LRU list for
MADV_FREEpages could solve the issues. We can directly reclaimMADV_FREEpages without writting them out to swap, so the first issue could be fixed. If onlyMADV_FREEpages are in the new list, page reclaim can easily reclaim such pages without interference of file or anonymous pages. The memory pressure issue will disappear.
Quoted 6 lines
Actually Minchan posted patches to add the LRU list before, but he didn't pursue. So I picked up them and the patches are based on Minchan's previous patches. The main difference between my patches and Minchan previous patches is page reclaim policy. Minchan's patches introduces a knob to balance the reclaim of
MADV_FREEpages and anon/file pages, while the patches always reclaimMADV_FREEpages first if there are. I described the reason in patch 5.
First of all, thanks for th effort to support MADV_FREE for swapless system, Shaohua!
CCing Daniel,
The reason I have postponed is due to controverial part about balancing used-once vs. madv_freed apges. I thought it doesn't make sense to reclaim madv_freed pages first even if there are lots of used-once pages.
Recently, Johannes posted patches for balancing file/anon and it was based on the cost model, IIRC. I wanted to base on it.
The idea is VM reclaims file-based pages and if refault happens, we can measure refault distance and sizeof(LRU_LAZYFREE list). If refault distance is smaller than lazyfree LRU list's size, it means the file-backed page have been kept in memory if we have discarded lazyfree pages so it adds more cost to reclaim lazyfree LRU list more agressively.
I tested your patch with simple MADV_FREE workload(just alloc and then repeated touch/madv_free) with background stream-read process. In that case, the MADV_FREE workload regressed in half without any gain for stream-read process.
I tested hacky code to simulate feedback loop I suggested idea and it restores the performance regression. I'm not saying below hacky patch should merge in but I think we should have used-once reclaim feedback logic to prevent unnecessary purging for madv_freed pages.
include/linux/mmzone.h +1 -0
@@ -703,6 +703,7 @@ typedef struct pglist_data {/* Per-node vmstats */ struct per_cpu_nodestat __percpu *per_cpu_nodestats;atomic_long_t vm_stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS ]; +bool lazyfree; } pg_data_t;#define node_present_pages (nid) (NODE_DATA(nid)->node_present_pages)
mm/vmscan.c +18 -15
@@ -2364,22 +2364,25 @@ static void shrink_node_memcg(struct pglist_data *pgdat, struct mem_cgroup *memcstruct blk_plug plug;bool scan_adjusted; -/* reclaim all lazyfree pages so don't apply priority */ - nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ] =lruvec_lru_size (lruvec,LRU_LAZYFREE , sc->reclaim_idx); -while (nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ]) { - nr_to_scan =min (nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ],SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX ); - nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ] -= nr_to_scan; - nr_reclaimed +=shrink_inactive_list (nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, -LRU_LAZYFREE ); - -if (nr_reclaimed >= nr_to_reclaim) -break ; -cond_resched (); - } +if (pgdat->lazyfree) { +/* reclaim all lazyfree pages so don't apply priority */ + nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ] =lruvec_lru_size (lruvec,LRU_LAZYFREE , sc->reclaim_idx); +while (nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ]) { + nr_to_scan =min (nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ],SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX ); + nr[LRU_LAZYFREE ] -= nr_to_scan; + nr_reclaimed +=shrink_inactive_list (nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc, +LRU_LAZYFREE ); + +if (nr_reclaimed >= nr_to_reclaim) +break ; +cond_resched (); + } -if (nr_reclaimed >= nr_to_reclaim) { - sc->nr_reclaimed += nr_reclaimed; -return ; +if (nr_reclaimed >= nr_to_reclaim) { + sc->nr_reclaimed += nr_reclaimed; + pgdat->lazyfree = false; +return ; + } }get_scan_count (lruvec, memcg, sc, nr, lru_pages);
mm/workingset.c +5 -1
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ void *workingset_eviction(struct address_space *mapping, struct page *page)bool workingset_refault (void *shadow) {unsigned long refault_distance; -unsigned long active_file; +unsigned long active_file, lazyfree;struct mem_cgroup *memcg;unsigned long eviction;struct lruvec *lruvec;
@@ -268,6 +268,7 @@ bool workingset_refault(void *shadow) lruvec =mem_cgroup_lruvec (pgdat, memcg); refault =atomic_long_read (&lruvec->inactive_age); active_file =lruvec_lru_size (lruvec,LRU_ACTIVE_FILE ,MAX_NR_ZONES ); + lazyfree =lruvec_lru_size (lruvec,LRU_LAZYFREE ,MAX_NR_ZONES );rcu_read_unlock ();/*
@@ -290,6 +291,9 @@ bool workingset_refault(void *shadow)inc_node_state (pgdat,WORKINGSET_REFAULT ); +if (refault_distance <= lazyfree) + pgdat->lazyfree = true; +if (refault_distance <= active_file) {inc_node_state (pgdat,WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE );return true;
Quoted 41 lines
For the third issue, we can add a separate RSS count for
MADV_FREEpages. The count will be increased in madvise syscall and decreased in page reclaim (eg, unmap). One issue isactivate_page(). AMADV_FREEpage can be promoted to active page there. But there isn'tmm_structcontext at that place. Iterating vma there sounds too silly. The patchset don't fix this issue yet. Hopefully somebody can share a hint how to fix this issue.Thanks,
ShaohuaMinchan previous patches:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=144800657002763&w=2Shaohua Li (6):
mm: add wrap for page accouting index
mm: add lazyfree page flag
mm: addLRU_LAZYFREElru list
mm: moveMADV_FREEpages intoLRU_LAZYFREElist
mm: reclaim lazyfree pages
mm: enableMADV_FREEfor swapless systemdrivers/base/node.c | 2 + drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c | 3 +- fs/proc/meminfo.c | 1 + fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 8 ++- include/linux/mm_inline.h | 41 +++++++++++++ include/linux/mmzone.h | 9 +++ include/linux/page-flags.h | 6 ++ include/linux/swap.h | 2 +- include/linux/vm_event_item.h | 2 +- include/trace/events/mmflags.h | 1 + include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 31 +++++----- kernel/power/snapshot.c | 1 + mm/compaction.c | 11 ++-- mm/huge_memory.c | 6 +- mm/khugepaged.c | 6 +- mm/madvise.c | 11 +--- mm/memcontrol.c | 4 ++ mm/memory-failure.c | 3 +- mm/memory_hotplug.c | 3 +-
Quoted 17 lines
mm/mempolicy.c | 3 +- mm/migrate.c | 29 ++++------ mm/page_alloc.c | 10 ++++ mm/rmap.c | 7 ++- mm/swap.c | 51 +++++++++------- mm/vmscan.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------- mm/vmstat.c | 4 ++ 26 files changed, 242 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)Signature · 7 lines
2.9.3 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>