On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 12:28:11PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > During proactive reclaim, we sometimes observe severe overreclaim, > with several thousand times more pages reclaimed than requested. > > This trace was obtained from shrink_lruvec() during such an instance: > > prio:0 anon_cost:1141521 file_cost:7767 > nr_reclaimed:4387406 nr_to_reclaim:1047 (or_factor:4190) > nr=[7161123 345 578 1111] > > While he reclaimer requested 4M, vmscan reclaimed close to 16G, most > of it by swapping. These requests take over a minute, during which the > write() to memory.reclaim is unkillably stuck inside the kernel. > > Digging into the source, this is caused by the proportional reclaim > bailout logic. This code tries to resolve a fundamental conflict: to > reclaim roughly what was requested, while also aging all LRUs fairly > and in accordance to their size, swappiness, refault rates etc. The > way it attempts fairness is that once the reclaim goal has been > reached, it stops scanning the LRUs with the smaller remaining scan > targets, and adjusts the remainder of the bigger LRUs according to how > much of the smaller LRUs was scanned. It then finishes scanning that > remainder regardless of the reclaim goal. > > This works fine if priority levels are low and the LRU lists are > comparable in size. However, in this instance, the cgroup that is > targeted by proactive reclaim has almost no files left - they've > already been squeezed out by proactive reclaim earlier - and the > remaining anon pages are hot. Anon rotations cause the priority level > to drop to 0, which results in reclaim targeting all of anon (a lot) > and all of file (almost nothing). By the time reclaim decides to bail, > it has scanned most or all of the file target, and therefor must also > scan most or all of the enormous anon target. This target is thousands > of times larger than the reclaim goal, thus causing the overreclaim. > > The bailout code hasn't changed in years, why is this failing now? > The most likely explanations are two other recent changes in anon > reclaim: > > 1. Before the series starting with commit 5df741963d52 ("mm: fix LRU > balancing effect of new transparent huge pages"), the VM was > overall relatively reluctant to swap at all, even if swap was > configured. This means the LRU balancing code didn't come into play > as often as it does now, and mostly in high pressure situations > where pronounced swap activity wouldn't be as surprising. > > 2. For historic reasons, shrink_lruvec() loops on the scan targets of > all LRU lists except the active anon one, meaning it would bail if > the only remaining pages to scan were active anon - even if there > were a lot of them. > > Before the series starting with commit ccc5dc67340c ("mm/vmscan: > make active/inactive ratio as 1:1 for anon lru"), most anon pages > would live on the active LRU; the inactive one would contain only a > handful of preselected reclaim candidates. After the series, anon > gets aged similarly to file, and the inactive list is the default > for new anon pages as well, making it often the much bigger list. > > As a result, the VM is now more likely to actually finish large > anon targets than before. > > Change the code such that only one SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX-sized nudge toward > the larger LRU lists is made before bailing out on a met reclaim goal. > > This fixes the extreme overreclaim problem. > > Fairness is more subtle and harder to evaluate. No obvious misbehavior > was observed on the test workload, in any case. Conceptually, fairness > should primarily be a cumulative effect from regular, lower priority > scans. Once the VM is in trouble and needs to escalate scan targets to > make forward progress, fairness needs to take a backseat. This is also > acknowledged by the myriad exceptions in get_scan_count(). This patch > makes fairness decrease gradually, as it keeps fairness work static > over increasing priority levels with growing scan targets. This should > make more sense - although we may have to re-visit the exact values. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs