* Re: [PATCH RFC] delayacct: add memory reclaim delay in get_page_from_freelist
[not found] ` <SH0PR01MB0587E4A7886C9642CCF1F8DBC1E5A@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
@ 2023-09-02 23:44 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <SH0PR01MB0587592CA2974791B177BFA4C1E8A@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2023-09-02 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: liwenyu01; +Cc: linux-mm, linux-kernel, wangyun
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 07:26:20 +0000 "liwenyu01@bilibili.com" <liwenyu01@bilibili.com> wrote:
> reclaim of the task in do_try_to_free_pages(). In systems with NUMA
> open, some tasks occasionally experience slower response times, but the
> total count of reclaim does not increase, using ftrace can show that
> node_reclaim has occurred.
>
> The memory reclaim occurring in get_page_from_freelist() is also due to
> heavy memory load. To get the impact of tasks in memory reclaim, this
> patch adds the statistics of the memory reclaim delay statistics for
> __node_reclaim().
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -8010,6 +8010,7 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
>
> cond_resched();
> psi_memstall_enter(&pflags);
> + delayacct_freepages_start();
> fs_reclaim_acquire(sc.gfp_mask);
> /*
> * We need to be able to allocate from the reserves for RECLAIM_UNMAP
> @@ -8032,6 +8033,7 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
> memalloc_noreclaim_restore(noreclaim_flag);
> fs_reclaim_release(sc.gfp_mask);
> psi_memstall_leave(&pflags);
> + delayacct_freepages_end();
>
> trace_mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_end(sc.nr_reclaimed);
__node_reclaim() calls shrink_node() which at some point will call
do_try_to_free_pages() (yes?), which calls delayacct_freepages_start().
So we're effectively nesting calls to delayacct_freepages_start(),
which isn't designed for that?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH RFC] delayacct: add memory reclaim delay in get_page_from_freelist
[not found] ` <SH0PR01MB0587592CA2974791B177BFA4C1E8A@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
@ 2023-09-06 0:53 ` Education Directorate
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Education Directorate @ 2023-09-06 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: liwenyu01; +Cc: akpm, linux-mm, linux-kernel, wangyun
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 05:32:15AM +0000, liwenyu01@bilibili.com wrote:
> >> reclaim of the task in do_try_to_free_pages(). In systems with NUMA
> >> open, some tasks occasionally experience slower response times, but the
> >> total count of reclaim does not increase, using ftrace can show that
> >> node_reclaim has occurred.
> >>
> >> The memory reclaim occurring in get_page_from_freelist() is also due to
> >> heavy memory load. To get the impact of tasks in memory reclaim, this
> >> patch adds the statistics of the memory reclaim delay statistics for
> >> __node_reclaim().
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> >> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> >> @@ -8010,6 +8010,7 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
> >>
> >> cond_resched();
> >> psi_memstall_enter(&pflags);
> >> + delayacct_freepages_start();
> >> fs_reclaim_acquire(sc.gfp_mask);
> >> /*
> >> * We need to be able to allocate from the reserves for RECLAIM_UNMAP
> >> @@ -8032,6 +8033,7 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
> >> memalloc_noreclaim_restore(noreclaim_flag);
> >> fs_reclaim_release(sc.gfp_mask);
> >> psi_memstall_leave(&pflags);
> >> + delayacct_freepages_end();
> >>
> >> trace_mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_end(sc.nr_reclaimed);
> >
> > __node_reclaim() calls shrink_node() which at some point will call
> > do_try_to_free_pages() (yes?), which calls delayacct_freepages_start().
> >
> > So we're effectively nesting calls to delayacct_freepages_start(),
> > which isn't designed for that?
> >
> sorry, the last reply was a mistake.
>
> It seems that no point in shrink_node() will call do_try_to_free_pages().
> And do_try_to_free_pages() will call shrink_node() through shrink_zones(),
> if shrink_node() also has some point will call do_try_to_free_pages,then
> delayacct_freepages_start() is nested now?
That's because shrink_node() goes through shrink_list() via
shrink_lruvec()? do_try_to_free_pages() will call shrink_node(). Ideally
we should have some counters around __node_reclaim() and balance_pgdat()
like psi_memstall_* does. Do you want to mimic what psi_memstall_* does?
This would change the definition of delayacct free pages, but I don't think
it will make it worse.
Balbir Singh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-09-06 0:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <SH0PR01MB058780B26AB21BEB8E76B6BBC11CA@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
[not found] ` <SH0PR01MB0587E4A7886C9642CCF1F8DBC1E5A@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
2023-09-02 23:44 ` [PATCH RFC] delayacct: add memory reclaim delay in get_page_from_freelist Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <SH0PR01MB0587592CA2974791B177BFA4C1E8A@SH0PR01MB0587.CHNPR01.prod.partner.outlook.cn>
2023-09-06 0:53 ` Education Directorate
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®