Re: [RFC] mm: indirectly reclaimable memory and dcache

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:17:13 +0000 Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote:

> I was reported about suspicious growth of unreclaimable slabs
> on some machines. I've found that it happens on machines
> with low memory pressure, and these unreclaimable slabs
> are external names attached to dentries.
> 
> External names are allocated using generic kmalloc() function,
> so they are accounted as unreclaimable. But they are held
> by dentries, which are reclaimable, and they will be reclaimed
> under the memory pressure.
> 
> In particular, this breaks MemAvailable calculation, as it
> doesn't take unreclaimable slabs into account.
> This leads to a silly situation, when a machine is almost idle,
> has no memory pressure and therefore has a big dentry cache.
> And the resulting MemAvailable is too low to start a new workload.
> 
> To resolve this issue, a new mm counter is introduced:
> NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES .
> Since it's not possible to count such objects on per-page basis,
> let's make the unit obvious (by analogy to NR_KERNEL_STACK_KB).
> 
> The counter is increased in dentry allocation path, if an external
> name structure is allocated; and it's decreased in dentry freeing
> path. I believe, that it's not the only case in the kernel, when
> we do have such indirectly reclaimable memory, so I expect more
> use cases to be added.
> 
> This counter is used to adjust MemAvailable calculations:
> indirectly reclaimable memory is considered as available.
> 
> To reproduce the problem I've used the following Python script:
>   import os
> 
>   for iter in range (0, 10000000):
>       try:
>           name = ("/some_long_name_%d" % iter) + "_" * 220
>           os.stat(name)
>       except Exception:
>           pass
> 
> Without this patch:
>   $ cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemAvailable
>   MemAvailable:    7811688 kB
>   $ python indirect.py
>   $ cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemAvailable
>   MemAvailable:    2753052 kB
> 
> With the patch:
>   $ cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemAvailable
>   MemAvailable:    7809516 kB
>   $ python indirect.py
>   $ cat /proc/meminfo | grep MemAvailable
>   MemAvailable:    7749144 kB
> 
> Also, this patch adds a corresponding entry to /proc/vmstat:
> 
>   $ cat /proc/vmstat | grep indirect
>   nr_indirectly_reclaimable 5117499104
> 
>   $ echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
> 
>   $ cat /proc/vmstat | grep indirect
>   nr_indirectly_reclaimable 7104

hm, I guess so...

I wonder if it should be more general, as there are probably other
potential users of NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES.  And they might be
using alloc_pages() or even vmalloc()?  Whereas
NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES is pretty closely tied to kmalloc, at
least in the code comments.

If we're really OK with the "only for kmalloc" concept then why create
NR_INDIRECTLY_RECLAIMABLE_BYTES at all?  Could we just use
NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE to account the external names?  After all, kmalloc
is slab.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux