From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f174.google.com (mail-pg1-f174.google.com [209.85.215.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B981CA4E for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 05:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775019721; cv=none; b=JLxyhfq6fCc62MFvKWZEaB2BzcMf97mpeQWHMiT+kwtWzo2guyRsQnd3U+gbskXKjaiZyvf7oRRJ4UCSRHJkZ3GPVIGQ7DagsCeb8MHlQFFH5fjIgidn5Ksy7XudbgQ3lfvqf3uzX3kuBMBn0DArpCUdHDSX+TiRnt6mA/7NXhE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775019721; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EMJx0JzCDymmDbjw8WmM3Zu9zNtZvv2aod/GZ9SatVw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=dJZggMcX9EXiZSsi3evam4pym2KYiYqIWQlmJHo8ozGWBivI+Z7uZk20L3Z3LyWxz6DoI6+TAsWiWuAX5NKBYVMElxXpyrqxMUfAmgX7BdAVGkBMGBlJRY3YWAuJA2RpB7Bs5Al0f8KJDDLCRgPM6lqkQdULtm3Gki2X35aU+v0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=YVMcIvSH; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="YVMcIvSH" Received: by mail-pg1-f174.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-c6dd5b01e14so2529631a12.0 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:02:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1775019719; x=1775624519; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OOpyS9/oME1LQxC/LMAj1sLy32p3fU6TvzMpmXikFow=; b=YVMcIvSH72E2fuI4unjI3fI5zsqIeD4bsV0+XiI8sLm8CwAzIaI74L2FEAlbnsZ8Wp hfbQySMwgbs/y4qJIYNiyGWufNAswXStoMKZuRo3ikOD6t4Q48sMa96eHz0BGy11H5jr ZDBtbnHI21k8PbslLNrptmXay+jM2GIFLCOmoTAepXmBUANpBUGiTElMLAiciMmxnygo MuPaMXcVVhKg8gVhN1lkUfDURUjtsD+Fvosv9F7qzyOxstS4b91g8ePjF5NiDorgq4Fm dukNn9SeTKolWSvCnTmnslozEnIkNDwONkoOxlPz9z1V9S8PAdpi9VLUWm+7znUM5Jdf vgtw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1775019719; x=1775624519; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=OOpyS9/oME1LQxC/LMAj1sLy32p3fU6TvzMpmXikFow=; b=LLbat4ma66qXGbeLJa/E4xw+ka555o55IZAXUlnWDUHbPp3GVMK8H5KL1nWfeqO49B EqCjxAhicJS3PDPWpBNNrHBzA1rWxOHr5WqrMBM8922Yu4mUsGtg/zoAoyidT41BW/QK hjBFzlEVrAHg4LrLJPt242AHUsAZjY0L36o/39Tn1qT31ICoRSZ1CgUGGh8PRxkBUbEA fFg0hr6YB1JmMwSSYLVgm697RGGUFkvjZ/t4Pbm+9EqEar6IKt7JYJwqcrmxReNOVdFb 2CuNHwxPVhOiNGqPQbA1qN/qpWxf5gaB/SRYKGFG6RE1Qse3QWlutTeTsC8eRwIOUJYT ZGXA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU6sENgPamZZmfz3sqwnpZ7uUQitxBru0j6PNLxN7+nRIDQq8xyWZuS7+5HlIBVBgbTj6WvGWf3ApJK3cY=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz/f/pEiXc2fhZBH/51YgatDNdFMGni1/RIkZffrybH/vir7Ofw f4nh6f69bukeeGX7dhMxA/EYNJMP57XRorYM9yr0lNAwNqrGCggEzm4T X-Gm-Gg: ATEYQzxdw8yLbCXxcOpCUjcUchbyqgsBhUJWGYv0/LYwys2AuSxRVZwOk5RaRhgJpD7 KvNP0QoWemh3fXJR5Q53pV5laPDDg6iXI6p6OeS9CGYcr9rX8u70vnPPqB9dpM+GxZ6A7lEB7cd 5/v2qudk+0/GuNhN91vJepqOwAie1NfQLEOeSSSNvVC1qr/EiTuZ/OMsRLPMECcT77ZkFHEmBaJ 0WRG36SQBa6uXtwH7nu1O7/Xe2WYxMCitcqG65PVi19byjGn7cbY8DiExUY7wqNZ5WRElAnZQEc 2q78lg5vQVCVbl7p2CG3Vp8rSfM8InIRYSnnkSH3NU8OAk3WAtp1RwOjP5A5pLaVf79bK2/5d45 IgUSIw3Xn9xrcm566ES3CY+3rBzIby2KaDP1qf4xXpPGTcD0LE3HmP4xQshkvgltP9ir0ENIWhY tWqJ6UeY05hdJojpByNHS6/HruDKAnvKr3ij2CV6SxpfcMpMOnxi/FAMiuS8+jt7bchoM1r1s6x DET8y9WOQ5+cHRP1AO7lDBgAixnIjSpHgURRkCX9N6G X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:72a3:b0:39c:4c23:a175 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-39ef77161eemr1966646637.45.1775019718967; Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2408:840d:2000:afa:a06d:889c:87b5:c739? ([2408:840d:2000:afa:a06d:889c:87b5:c739]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-c76b5b9f153sm3797650a12.18.2026.03.31.22.01.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 13:01:46 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] mm/vmscan: unify writeback reclaim statistic and throttling To: kasong@tencent.com, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: Andrew Morton , Axel Rasmussen , Yuanchu Xie , Wei Xu , Johannes Weiner , David Hildenbrand , Michal Hocko , Qi Zheng , Shakeel Butt , Lorenzo Stoakes , Barry Song , David Stevens , Chen Ridong , Yafang Shao , Yu Zhao , Zicheng Wang , Kalesh Singh , Suren Baghdasaryan , Chris Li , Vernon Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Qi Zheng , Baolin Wang References: <20260329-mglru-reclaim-v2-0-b53a3678513c@tencent.com> <20260329-mglru-reclaim-v2-12-b53a3678513c@tencent.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Leno Hou In-Reply-To: <20260329-mglru-reclaim-v2-12-b53a3678513c@tencent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 3/29/26 3:52 AM, Kairui Song via B4 Relay wrote: > From: Kairui Song > > Currently MGLRU and non-MGLRU handle the reclaim statistic and > writeback handling very differently, especially throttling. > Basically MGLRU just ignored the throttling part. > > Let's just unify this part, use a helper to deduplicate the code > so both setups will share the same behavior. Also remove the > folio_clear_reclaim in isolate_folio which was actively invalidating > the congestion control. PG_reclaim is now handled by shrink_folio_list, > keeping it in isolate_folio is not helpful. > > Test using following reproducer using bash: > > echo "Setup a slow device using dm delay" > dd if=/dev/zero of=/var/tmp/backing bs=1M count=2048 > LOOP=$(losetup --show -f /var/tmp/backing) > mkfs.ext4 -q $LOOP > echo "0 $(blockdev --getsz $LOOP) delay $LOOP 0 0 $LOOP 0 1000" | \ > dmsetup create slow_dev > mkdir -p /mnt/slow && mount /dev/mapper/slow_dev /mnt/slow > > echo "Start writeback pressure" > sync && echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches > mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb > echo 128M > /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb/memory.max > (echo $BASHPID > /sys/fs/cgroup/test_wb/cgroup.procs && \ > dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/slow/testfile bs=1M count=192) > > echo "Clean up" > echo "0 $(blockdev --getsz $LOOP) error" | dmsetup load slow_dev > dmsetup resume slow_dev > umount -l /mnt/slow && sync > dmsetup remove slow_dev > Hi Kairui, I have tested this patch series on both stable v6.1.163 and 7.0.0-rc5 regarding the writeback throttling issue you described on arm64 platform. Test Results: 1. Kernel 6.1.163: I was unable to reproduce the OOM issue with the provided test script. This is expected as the MGLRU writeback handling might behave differently or the issue is less prominent in this specific stable branch. 2. Kernel 7.0.0-rc5: I successfully reproduced the OOM issue using your bash script. The dd process gets OOM killed shortly after starting the writeback pressure. Verification: After applying your patch, I re-ran the test on 7.0-rc5: 1. The congestion control/throttling is now working as expected. 2. The OOM issue is resolved, and the dd process completes successfully without being killed. Tested-by: Leno Hou > Before this commit, `dd` will get OOM killed immediately if > MGLRU is enabled. Classic LRU is fine. > > After this commit, congestion control is now effective and no more > spin on LRU or premature OOM. > > Stress test on other workloads also looking good. > > Suggested-by: Chen Ridong > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song > --- > mm/vmscan.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > index 1783da54ada1..83c8fdf8fdc4 100644 > --- a/mm/vmscan.c > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > @@ -1942,6 +1942,44 @@ static int current_may_throttle(void) > return !(current->flags & PF_LOCAL_THROTTLE); > } > > +static void handle_reclaim_writeback(unsigned long nr_taken, > + struct pglist_data *pgdat, > + struct scan_control *sc, > + struct reclaim_stat *stat) > +{ > + /* > + * If dirty folios are scanned that are not queued for IO, it > + * implies that flushers are not doing their job. This can > + * happen when memory pressure pushes dirty folios to the end of > + * the LRU before the dirty limits are breached and the dirty > + * data has expired. It can also happen when the proportion of > + * dirty folios grows not through writes but through memory > + * pressure reclaiming all the clean cache. And in some cases, > + * the flushers simply cannot keep up with the allocation > + * rate. Nudge the flusher threads in case they are asleep. > + */ > + if (stat->nr_unqueued_dirty == nr_taken && nr_taken) { > + wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN); > + /* > + * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up > + * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios > + * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()). > + * > + * Flusher may not be able to issue writeback quickly > + * enough for cgroupv1 writeback throttling to work > + * on a large system. > + */ > + if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc)) > + reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK); > + } > + > + sc->nr.dirty += stat->nr_dirty; > + sc->nr.congested += stat->nr_congested; > + sc->nr.writeback += stat->nr_writeback; > + sc->nr.immediate += stat->nr_immediate; > + sc->nr.taken += nr_taken; > +} > + > /* > * shrink_inactive_list() is a helper for shrink_node(). It returns the number > * of reclaimed pages > @@ -2005,39 +2043,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, > lruvec_lock_irq(lruvec); > lru_note_cost_unlock_irq(lruvec, file, stat.nr_pageout, > nr_scanned - nr_reclaimed); > - > - /* > - * If dirty folios are scanned that are not queued for IO, it > - * implies that flushers are not doing their job. This can > - * happen when memory pressure pushes dirty folios to the end of > - * the LRU before the dirty limits are breached and the dirty > - * data has expired. It can also happen when the proportion of > - * dirty folios grows not through writes but through memory > - * pressure reclaiming all the clean cache. And in some cases, > - * the flushers simply cannot keep up with the allocation > - * rate. Nudge the flusher threads in case they are asleep. > - */ > - if (stat.nr_unqueued_dirty == nr_taken) { > - wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN); > - /* > - * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up > - * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios > - * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()). > - * > - * Flusher may not be able to issue writeback quickly > - * enough for cgroupv1 writeback throttling to work > - * on a large system. > - */ > - if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc)) > - reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK); > - } > - > - sc->nr.dirty += stat.nr_dirty; > - sc->nr.congested += stat.nr_congested; > - sc->nr.writeback += stat.nr_writeback; > - sc->nr.immediate += stat.nr_immediate; > - sc->nr.taken += nr_taken; > - > + handle_reclaim_writeback(nr_taken, pgdat, sc, &stat); > trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive(pgdat->node_id, > nr_scanned, nr_reclaimed, &stat, sc->priority, file); > return nr_reclaimed; > @@ -4651,9 +4657,6 @@ static bool isolate_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, struct sca > if (!folio_test_referenced(folio)) > set_mask_bits(&folio->flags.f, LRU_REFS_MASK, 0); > > - /* for shrink_folio_list() */ > - folio_clear_reclaim(folio); > - > success = lru_gen_del_folio(lruvec, folio, true); > VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!success, folio); > > @@ -4833,26 +4836,11 @@ static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, > retry: > reclaimed = shrink_folio_list(&list, pgdat, sc, &stat, false, memcg); > sc->nr_reclaimed += reclaimed; > + handle_reclaim_writeback(isolated, pgdat, sc, &stat); > trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive(pgdat->node_id, > type_scanned, reclaimed, &stat, sc->priority, > type ? LRU_INACTIVE_FILE : LRU_INACTIVE_ANON); > > - /* > - * If too many file cache in the coldest generation can't be evicted > - * due to being dirty, wake up the flusher. > - */ > - if (stat.nr_unqueued_dirty == isolated) { > - wakeup_flusher_threads(WB_REASON_VMSCAN); > - > - /* > - * For cgroupv1 dirty throttling is achieved by waking up > - * the kernel flusher here and later waiting on folios > - * which are in writeback to finish (see shrink_folio_list()). > - */ > - if (!writeback_throttling_sane(sc)) > - reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_WRITEBACK); > - } > - > list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(folio, next, &list, lru) { > DEFINE_MIN_SEQ(lruvec); > > @@ -4895,6 +4883,7 @@ static int evict_folios(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, > > if (!list_empty(&list)) { > skip_retry = true; > + isolated = 0; > goto retry; > } > > -- Best regards, Leno Hou