From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752148AbdBFNYQ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:24:16 -0500
Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33730 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751164AbdBFNYO (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 6 Feb 2017 08:24:14 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 14:24:11 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: vinayak menon <vinayakm.list@gmail.com>
Cc: Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
        vbabka@suse.cz, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com,
        anton.vorontsov@linaro.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        shashim@codeaurora.org, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 RESEND] mm: vmpressure: fix sending wrong events on
 underflow
Message-ID: <20170206132410.GC10298@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <1486383850-30444-1-git-send-email-vinmenon@codeaurora.org>
 <1486383850-30444-2-git-send-email-vinmenon@codeaurora.org>
 <20170206124037.GA10298@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAOaiJ-kf+1xO9R5u33-JADpNpHiyyfbq0CKY014E8L+ErKioDA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOaiJ-kf+1xO9R5u33-JADpNpHiyyfbq0CKY014E8L+ErKioDA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon 06-02-17 18:39:03, vinayak menon wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon 06-02-17 17:54:10, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> > [...]
> >> diff --git a/mm/vmpressure.c b/mm/vmpressure.c
> >> index 149fdf6..3281b34 100644
> >> --- a/mm/vmpressure.c
> >> +++ b/mm/vmpressure.c
> >> @@ -112,8 +112,10 @@ static enum vmpressure_levels vmpressure_calc_level(unsigned long scanned,
> >>                                                   unsigned long reclaimed)
> >>  {
> >>       unsigned long scale = scanned + reclaimed;
> >> -     unsigned long pressure;
> >> +     unsigned long pressure = 0;
> >>
> >> +     if (reclaimed >= scanned)
> >> +             goto out;
> >
> > This deserves a comment IMHO. Besides that, why shouldn't we normalize
> > the result already in vmpressure()? Please note that the tree == true
> > path will aggregate both scanned and reclaimed and that already skews
> > numbers.
> Sure. Will add a comment.
> IIUC, normalizing in vmpressure() means something like this which you
> mentioned in one
> of your previous emails right ?
> 
> + if (reclaimed > scanned)
> +          reclaimed = scanned;

yes or scanned = reclaimed.

> Considering a scan window of 512 pages and without above piece of
> code, if the first scanning is of a THP page
> Scan=1,Reclaimed=512
> If the next 511 scans results in 0 reclaimed pages
> total_scan=512,Reclaimed=512 => vmpressure 0

I am not sure I understand. What do you mean by next scans? We do not
modify counters outside of vmpressure? If you mean next iteration of
shrink_node's loop then this changeshouldn't make a difference, no?

> 
> Now with the above piece of code in place
> Scan=1,Reclaimed=1, then
> Scan=511, Reclaimed=0
> total_scan=512,Reclaimed=1 => critical vmpressure

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs