linux/include/linux/xarray.h

1915 lines
58 KiB

mm: fix page cache convergence regression Since a28334862993 ("page cache: Finish XArray conversion"), on most major Linux distributions, the page cache doesn't correctly transition when the hot data set is changing, and leaves the new pages thrashing indefinitely instead of kicking out the cold ones. On a freshly booted, freshly ssh'd into virtual machine with 1G RAM running stock Arch Linux: [root@ham ~]# ./reclaimtest.sh + dd of=workingset-a bs=1M count=0 seek=600 + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + ./mincore workingset-a 153600/153600 workingset-a + dd of=workingset-b bs=1M count=0 seek=600 + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + ./mincore workingset-a workingset-b 104029/153600 workingset-a 120086/153600 workingset-b + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + cat workingset-b + ./mincore workingset-a workingset-b 104029/153600 workingset-a 120268/153600 workingset-b workingset-b is a 600M file on a 1G host that is otherwise entirely idle. No matter how often it's being accessed, it won't get cached. While investigating, I noticed that the non-resident information gets aggressively reclaimed - /proc/vmstat::workingset_nodereclaim. This is a problem because a workingset transition like this relies on the non-resident information tracked in the page cache tree of evicted file ranges: when the cache faults are refaults of recently evicted cache, we challenge the existing active set, and that allows a new workingset to establish itself. Tracing the shrinker that maintains this memory revealed that all page cache tree nodes were allocated to the root cgroup. This is a problem, because 1) the shrinker sizes the amount of non-resident information it keeps to the size of the cgroup's other memory and 2) on most major Linux distributions, only kernel threads live in the root cgroup and everything else gets put into services or session groups: [root@ham ~]# cat /proc/self/cgroup 0::/user.slice/user-0.slice/session-c1.scope As a result, we basically maintain no non-resident information for the workloads running on the system, thus breaking the caching algorithm. Looking through the code, I found the culprit in the above-mentioned patch: when switching from the radix tree to xarray, it dropped the __GFP_ACCOUNT flag from the tree node allocations - the flag that makes sure the allocated memory gets charged to and tracked by the cgroup of the calling process - in this case, the one doing the fault. To fix this, allow xarray users to specify per-tree flag that makes xarray allocate nodes using __GFP_ACCOUNT. Then restore the page cache tree annotation to request such cgroup tracking for the cache nodes. With this patch applied, the page cache correctly converges on new workingsets again after just a few iterations: [root@ham ~]# ./reclaimtest.sh + dd of=workingset-a bs=1M count=0 seek=600 + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + cat workingset-a + ./mincore workingset-a 153600/153600 workingset-a + dd of=workingset-b bs=1M count=0 seek=600 + cat workingset-b + ./mincore workingset-a workingset-b 124607/153600 workingset-a 87876/153600 workingset-b + cat workingset-b + ./mincore workingset-a workingset-b 81313/153600 workingset-a 133321/153600 workingset-b + cat workingset-b + ./mincore workingset-a workingset-b 63036/153600 workingset-a 153600/153600 workingset-b Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.20+ Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
2019-05-24 10:12:46 -04:00
2020-10-15 20:05:13 -07:00
xarray: add xas_try_split() to split a multi-index entry Patch series "Buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) folio split", v10. This patchset adds a new buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) large folio split from a order-n folio to order-m with m < n. It reduces 1. the total number of after-split folios from 2^(n-m) to n-m+1; 2. the amount of memory needed for multi-index xarray split from 2^(n/6-m/6) to n/6-m/6, assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT=6; 3. keep more large folios after a split from all order-m folios to order-(n-1) to order-m folios. For example, to split an order-9 to order-0, folio split generates 10 (or 11 for anonymous memory) folios instead of 512, allocates 1 xa_node instead of 8, and leaves 1 order-8, 1 order-7, ..., 1 order-1 and 2 order-0 folios (or 4 order-0 for anonymous memory) instead of 512 order-0 folios. Instead of duplicating existing split_huge_page*() code, __folio_split() is introduced as the shared backend code for both split_huge_page_to_list_to_order() and folio_split(). __folio_split() can support both uniform split and buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) split. All existing split_huge_page*() users can be gradually converted to use folio_split() if possible. In this patchset, I converted truncate_inode_partial_folio() to use folio_split(). xfstests quick group passed for both tmpfs and xfs. I also semi-replicated Hugh's test[12] and ran it without any issue for almost 24 hours. This patch (of 8): A preparation patch for non-uniform folio split, which always split a folio into half iteratively, and minimal xarray entry split. Currently, xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() always split all slots from a multi-index entry. They cost the same number of xa_node as the to-be-split slots. For example, to split an order-9 entry, which takes 2^(9-6)=8 slots, assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT is 6 (!CONFIG_BASE_SMALL), 8 xa_node are needed. Instead xas_try_split() is intended to be used iteratively to split the order-9 entry into 2 order-8 entries, then split one order-8 entry, based on the given index, to 2 order-7 entries, ..., and split one order-1 entry to 2 order-0 entries. When splitting the order-6 entry and a new xa_node is needed, xas_try_split() will try to allocate one if possible. As a result, xas_try_split() would only need 1 xa_node instead of 8. When a new xa_node is needed during the split, xas_try_split() can try to allocate one but no more. -ENOMEM will be return if a node cannot be allocated. -EINVAL will be return if a sibling node is split or cascade split happens, where two or more new nodes are needed, and these are not supported by xas_try_split(). xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() split an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | | ------- --- --- ------- | | ... | | V V V V ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- | xa_node | | xa_node | ... | xa_node | | xa_node | ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- xas_try_split() splits an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | V ----------- | xa_node | ----------- Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250307174001.242794-1-ziy@nvidia.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250307174001.242794-2-ziy@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> Cc: Kirill A. Shuemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> Cc: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-03-07 12:39:54 -05:00
mm/filemap: use xas_try_split() in __filemap_add_folio() Patch series "Minimize xa_node allocation during xarry split", v3. When splitting a multi-index entry in XArray from order-n to order-m, existing xas_split_alloc()+xas_split() approach requires 2^(n % XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) xa_node allocations. But its callers, __filemap_add_folio() and shmem_split_large_entry(), use at most 1 xa_node. To minimize xa_node allocation and remove the limitation of no split from order-12 (or above) to order-0 (or anything between 0 and 5)[1], xas_try_split() was added[2], which allocates (n / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT - m / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) xa_node. It is used for non-uniform folio split, but can be used by __filemap_add_folio() and shmem_split_large_entry(). xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() split an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | | ------- --- --- ------- | | ... | | V V V V ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- | xa_node | | xa_node | ... | xa_node | | xa_node | ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- xas_try_split() splits an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | V ----------- | xa_node | ----------- xas_try_split() is designed to be called iteratively with n = m + 1. xas_try_split_mini_order() is added to minmize the number of calls to xas_try_split() by telling the caller the next minimal order to split to instead of n - 1. Splitting order-n to order-m when m= l * XA_CHUNK_SHIFT does not require xa_node allocation and requires 1 xa_node when n=l * XA_CHUNK_SHIFT and m = n - 1, so it is OK to use xas_try_split() with n > m + 1 when no new xa_node is needed. xfstests quick group test passed on xfs and tmpfs. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/Z6YX3RznGLUD07Ao@casper.infradead.org/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250226210032.2044041-1-ziy@nvidia.com/ This patch (of 2): During __filemap_add_folio(), a shadow entry is covering n slots and a folio covers m slots with m < n is to be added. Instead of splitting all n slots, only the m slots covered by the folio need to be split and the remaining n-m shadow entries can be retained with orders ranging from m to n-1. This method only requires (n/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) - (m/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) new xa_nodes instead of (n % XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) * ((n/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) - (m/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT)) new xa_nodes, compared to the original xas_split_alloc() + xas_split() one. For example, to insert an order-0 folio when an order-9 shadow entry is present (assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT is 6), 1 xa_node is needed instead of 8. xas_try_split_min_order() is introduced to reduce the number of calls to xas_try_split() during split. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250314222113.711703-1-ziy@nvidia.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250314222113.711703-2-ziy@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Mattew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> Cc: Kirill A. Shuemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> Cc: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-03-14 18:21:12 -04:00
2020-10-15 20:05:13 -07:00
xarray: add xas_try_split() to split a multi-index entry Patch series "Buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) folio split", v10. This patchset adds a new buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) large folio split from a order-n folio to order-m with m < n. It reduces 1. the total number of after-split folios from 2^(n-m) to n-m+1; 2. the amount of memory needed for multi-index xarray split from 2^(n/6-m/6) to n/6-m/6, assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT=6; 3. keep more large folios after a split from all order-m folios to order-(n-1) to order-m folios. For example, to split an order-9 to order-0, folio split generates 10 (or 11 for anonymous memory) folios instead of 512, allocates 1 xa_node instead of 8, and leaves 1 order-8, 1 order-7, ..., 1 order-1 and 2 order-0 folios (or 4 order-0 for anonymous memory) instead of 512 order-0 folios. Instead of duplicating existing split_huge_page*() code, __folio_split() is introduced as the shared backend code for both split_huge_page_to_list_to_order() and folio_split(). __folio_split() can support both uniform split and buddy allocator like (or non-uniform) split. All existing split_huge_page*() users can be gradually converted to use folio_split() if possible. In this patchset, I converted truncate_inode_partial_folio() to use folio_split(). xfstests quick group passed for both tmpfs and xfs. I also semi-replicated Hugh's test[12] and ran it without any issue for almost 24 hours. This patch (of 8): A preparation patch for non-uniform folio split, which always split a folio into half iteratively, and minimal xarray entry split. Currently, xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() always split all slots from a multi-index entry. They cost the same number of xa_node as the to-be-split slots. For example, to split an order-9 entry, which takes 2^(9-6)=8 slots, assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT is 6 (!CONFIG_BASE_SMALL), 8 xa_node are needed. Instead xas_try_split() is intended to be used iteratively to split the order-9 entry into 2 order-8 entries, then split one order-8 entry, based on the given index, to 2 order-7 entries, ..., and split one order-1 entry to 2 order-0 entries. When splitting the order-6 entry and a new xa_node is needed, xas_try_split() will try to allocate one if possible. As a result, xas_try_split() would only need 1 xa_node instead of 8. When a new xa_node is needed during the split, xas_try_split() can try to allocate one but no more. -ENOMEM will be return if a node cannot be allocated. -EINVAL will be return if a sibling node is split or cascade split happens, where two or more new nodes are needed, and these are not supported by xas_try_split(). xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() split an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | | ------- --- --- ------- | | ... | | V V V V ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- | xa_node | | xa_node | ... | xa_node | | xa_node | ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- xas_try_split() splits an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | V ----------- | xa_node | ----------- Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250307174001.242794-1-ziy@nvidia.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250307174001.242794-2-ziy@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> Cc: Kirill A. Shuemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> Cc: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-03-07 12:39:54 -05:00
mm/filemap: use xas_try_split() in __filemap_add_folio() Patch series "Minimize xa_node allocation during xarry split", v3. When splitting a multi-index entry in XArray from order-n to order-m, existing xas_split_alloc()+xas_split() approach requires 2^(n % XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) xa_node allocations. But its callers, __filemap_add_folio() and shmem_split_large_entry(), use at most 1 xa_node. To minimize xa_node allocation and remove the limitation of no split from order-12 (or above) to order-0 (or anything between 0 and 5)[1], xas_try_split() was added[2], which allocates (n / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT - m / XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) xa_node. It is used for non-uniform folio split, but can be used by __filemap_add_folio() and shmem_split_large_entry(). xas_split_alloc() and xas_split() split an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | | ------- --- --- ------- | | ... | | V V V V ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- | xa_node | | xa_node | ... | xa_node | | xa_node | ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- xas_try_split() splits an order-9 to order-0: --------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | | | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | V ----------- | xa_node | ----------- xas_try_split() is designed to be called iteratively with n = m + 1. xas_try_split_mini_order() is added to minmize the number of calls to xas_try_split() by telling the caller the next minimal order to split to instead of n - 1. Splitting order-n to order-m when m= l * XA_CHUNK_SHIFT does not require xa_node allocation and requires 1 xa_node when n=l * XA_CHUNK_SHIFT and m = n - 1, so it is OK to use xas_try_split() with n > m + 1 when no new xa_node is needed. xfstests quick group test passed on xfs and tmpfs. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/Z6YX3RznGLUD07Ao@casper.infradead.org/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250226210032.2044041-1-ziy@nvidia.com/ This patch (of 2): During __filemap_add_folio(), a shadow entry is covering n slots and a folio covers m slots with m < n is to be added. Instead of splitting all n slots, only the m slots covered by the folio need to be split and the remaining n-m shadow entries can be retained with orders ranging from m to n-1. This method only requires (n/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) - (m/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) new xa_nodes instead of (n % XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) * ((n/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT) - (m/XA_CHUNK_SHIFT)) new xa_nodes, compared to the original xas_split_alloc() + xas_split() one. For example, to insert an order-0 folio when an order-9 shadow entry is present (assuming XA_CHUNK_SHIFT is 6), 1 xa_node is needed instead of 8. xas_try_split_min_order() is introduced to reduce the number of calls to xas_try_split() during split. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250314222113.711703-1-ziy@nvidia.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250314222113.711703-2-ziy@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Mattew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> Cc: Kirill A. Shuemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> Cc: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com> Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-03-14 18:21:12 -04:00
2020-10-15 20:05:13 -07:00