mm/vmscan: more restrictive condition for retry in do_try_to_free_pages

By reviewing code, I find that when enter do_try_to_free_pages, the
may_thrash is always clear, and it will retry shrink zones to tap
cgroup's reserves memory by setting may_thrash when the former
shrink_zones reclaim nothing.

However, when memcg is disabled or on legacy hierarchy, or there do not
have any memcg protected by low limit, it should not do this useless
retry at all, for we do not have any cgroup's reserves memory to tap,
and we have already done hard work but made no progress, which as Michal
pointed out in former version, we are trying hard to control the retry
logical of page alloctor, and the current additional round of reclaim is
just lame.

Therefore, to avoid this unneeded retrying and make code more readable,
we remove the may_thrash field in scan_control, instead, introduce
memcg_low_reclaim and memcg_low_skipped, and only retry when
memcg_low_skipped, by setting memcg_low_reclaim.

[[email protected]: remove may_thrash field, introduce mem_cgroup_reclaim]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Shakeel Butt <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Cc: Mel Gorman <[email protected]>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]>
Cc: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 8ce39867140be44e0329f2bd34988f3fd133e23b..e54c882d6789c6c974277b0a08ef43f729fbad3d 100644 (file)
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -97,8 +97,13 @@ struct scan_control {
        /* Can pages be swapped as part of reclaim? */
        unsigned int may_swap:1;
 
-       /* Can cgroups be reclaimed below their normal consumption range? */
-       unsigned int may_thrash:1;
+       /*
+        * Cgroups are not reclaimed below their configured memory.low,
+        * unless we threaten to OOM. If any cgroups are skipped due to
+        * memory.low and nothing was reclaimed, go back for memory.low.
+        */
+       unsigned int memcg_low_reclaim:1;
+       unsigned int memcg_low_skipped:1;
 
        unsigned int hibernation_mode:1;
 
@@ -2512,8 +2517,10 @@ static bool shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
                        unsigned long scanned;
 
                        if (mem_cgroup_low(root, memcg)) {
-                               if (!sc->may_thrash)
+                               if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) {
+                                       sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1;
                                        continue;
+                               }
                                mem_cgroup_events(memcg, MEMCG_LOW, 1);
                        }
 
@@ -2768,9 +2775,10 @@ retry:
                return 1;
 
        /* Untapped cgroup reserves?  Don't OOM, retry. */
-       if (!sc->may_thrash) {
+       if (sc->memcg_low_skipped) {
                sc->priority = initial_priority;
-               sc->may_thrash = 1;
+               sc->memcg_low_reclaim = 1;
+               sc->memcg_low_skipped = 0;
                goto retry;
        }