mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lian Wang <lianux.mm@gmail.com>
To: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Lian Wang <lianux.mm@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, david@kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
	qi.zheng@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, ljs@kernel.org,
	kasong@tencent.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com,
	weixugc@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	lyugaofei@xiaomi.com, stevensd@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] mm: mglru: avoid scanning empty generations in scan_folios()
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 14:41:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260730064122.11785-1-lianux.mm@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4w=gpjgwkndm3PAmZXxRm+E8ASG=6XFpprWwr3AxnpvSg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Barry,

I tested a list-based exhaustion check on top of the v2 series.

Using remaining > 0 still misses the case where remaining reaches zero
exactly when the last folio leaves the oldest generation. Since
scan_folios() still holds the lruvec lock, checking the generation's zone
lists directly avoids both this boundary and the scanned/nr_to_scan
page-versus-folio mismatch.

The change below only replaces the exhaustion check. It keeps the
priority-gated fallback unchanged, and reports the MIN_NR_GENS early
return as exhausted to preserve the current v2 behavior.

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 6a73be7590cd..59b8725a0650 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -4635,7 +4635,8 @@ static bool isolate_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct sca
 
 static int scan_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 		       struct scan_control *sc, int type, int tier,
-		       struct list_head *list, int *isolatedp)
+		       struct list_head *list, int *isolatedp,
+		       bool *scan_exhausted)
 {
 	int i;
 	int gen;
@@ -4650,8 +4651,10 @@ static int scan_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(nr_to_scan > MAX_LRU_BATCH);
 	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(list));
 
-	if (get_nr_gens(lruvec, type) == MIN_NR_GENS)
+	if (get_nr_gens(lruvec, type) == MIN_NR_GENS) {
+		*scan_exhausted = true;
 		return 0;
+	}
 
 	gen = lru_gen_from_seq(lrugen->min_seq[type]);
 
@@ -4704,6 +4707,14 @@ static int scan_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 				scanned, skipped, isolated,
 				type ? LRU_INACTIVE_FILE : LRU_INACTIVE_ANON);
 
+	*scan_exhausted = true;
+	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_ZONES; i++) {
+		if (!list_empty(&lrugen->folios[gen][type][i])) {
+			*scan_exhausted = false;
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+
 	*isolatedp = isolated;
 	return scanned;
 }
@@ -4757,11 +4768,13 @@ static int isolate_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 	int type = get_type_to_scan(lruvec, swappiness);
 
 	for_each_evictable_type(i, swappiness) {
+		bool scan_exhausted;
 		int scanned;
 		int tier = get_tier_idx(lruvec, type);
 
 		scanned = scan_folios(nr_to_scan, lruvec, sc,
-				      type, tier, list, isolated);
+				      type, tier, list, isolated,
+				      &scan_exhausted);
 
 		total_scanned += scanned;
 		if (*isolated) {
@@ -4770,15 +4783,12 @@ static int isolate_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec,
 			break;
 		}
 		/*
-		 * If scanned >= nr_to_scan or isolated >= MIN_LRU_BATCH,
-		 * avoid falling back to the other type. The preferred
-		 * type is still reclaimable; otherwise, it would have
-		 * already run out of reclaimable generations. Falling
-		 * back too readily can disrupt the positive_ctrl_err()
-		 * bias. Also, only fall back when reclaim is running at
-		 * a high priority.
+		 * The preferred type is still reclaimable unless this scan
+		 * target is exhausted. Preserve the existing priority-gated
+		 * fallback without inferring exhaustion from scanned, which
+		 * counts base pages rather than iterations.
 		 */
-		if (scanned < nr_to_scan && *isolated < MIN_LRU_BATCH) {
+		if (scan_exhausted) {
 			if (sc->priority > 2)
 				break;
 			type = !type;

I built and booted this on an arm64 VM with MGLRU enabled. A fresh
swappiness=200 pressure smoke with a 2 GiB file-cache setup and about
7 GiB of touched anonymous memory completed without a
WARN/Oops/BUG/panic.

Would this be worth considering for the next revision? If I misunderstood
the intended semantics, please ignore this.

Thanks,
Lian

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-30  6:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-26 12:21 [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] mm: mglru: fix swappiness behavior Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-26 12:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] mm: mglru: avoid scanning empty generations in scan_folios() Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-27 23:18   ` Barry Song
2026-07-30  6:41     ` Lian Wang [this message]
2026-07-30  7:05       ` Barry Song
2026-07-30  7:21         ` Lian Wang
2026-07-26 12:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] mm: mglru: only fall back when reclaim is running at high priority Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-26 22:08   ` Barry Song
2026-07-26 12:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] mm: mglru: prevent min_seq[type] from pointing to an empty generation Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-26 12:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] mm: mglru: run aging when pages are severely imbalanced across gens Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-28  3:46   ` Zicheng Wang
2026-07-28 11:20     ` Barry Song
2026-07-28 12:27       ` Zicheng Wang
2026-07-29 22:36         ` Barry Song
2026-07-30 11:38           ` wangzicheng
2026-07-30 12:22   ` Kairui Song
2026-07-26 12:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] mm: mglru: run aging if the preferred type has no folios in reclaimable gens Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-31  7:26   ` Baolin Wang
2026-07-31  9:01     ` Barry Song

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260730064122.11785-1-lianux.mm@gmail.com \
    --to=lianux.mm@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kasong@tencent.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=lyugaofei@xiaomi.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=stevensd@chromium.org \
    --cc=weixugc@google.com \
    --cc=yuanchu@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®