mm: do batched scans for mem_cgroup
For mem_cgroup, shrink_zone() may call shrink_list() with nr_to_scan=1, in
which case shrink_list() _still_ calls isolate_pages() with the much
larger SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX. It effectively scales up the inactive list scan
rate by up to 32 times.
For example, with 16k inactive pages and DEF_PRIORITY=12, (16k >> 12)=4.
So when shrink_zone() expects to scan 4 pages in the active/inactive list,
the active list will be scanned 4 pages, while the inactive list will be
(over) scanned SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX=32 pages in effect. And that could break
the balance between the two lists.
It can further impact the scan of anon active list, due to the anon
active/inactive ratio rebalance logic in balance_pgdat()/shrink_zone():
inactive anon list over scanned => inactive_anon_is_low() == TRUE
=> shrink_active_list()
=> active anon list over scanned
So the end result may be
- anon inactive => over scanned
- anon active => over scanned (maybe not as much)
- file inactive => over scanned
- file active => under scanned (relatively)
The accesses to nr_saved_scan are not lock protected and so not 100%
accurate, however we can tolerate small errors and the resulted small
imbalanced scan rates between zones.
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 770f011..84d9da1 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3809,7 +3809,7 @@
zone_pcp_init(zone);
for_each_lru(l) {
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&zone->lru[l].list);
- zone->lru[l].nr_saved_scan = 0;
+ zone->reclaim_stat.nr_saved_scan[l] = 0;
}
zone->reclaim_stat.recent_rotated[0] = 0;
zone->reclaim_stat.recent_rotated[1] = 0;