On 08/02/2018 07:47 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 02-08-18 18:32:44, Wei Wang wrote:
On 08/01/2018 07:34 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 01-08-18 19:12:25, Wei Wang wrote:
On 07/30/2018 05:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 27-07-18 17:24:55, Wei Wang wrote:
The OOM notifier is getting deprecated to use for the reasons mentioned
here by Michal Hocko: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/314
This patch replaces the virtio-balloon oom notifier with a shrinker
to release balloon pages on memory pressure.
It would be great to document the replacement. This is not a small
change...
OK. I plan to document the following to the commit log:
The OOM notifier is getting deprecated to use for the reasons:
- As a callout from the oom context, it is too subtle and easy to
generate bugs and corner cases which are hard to track;
- It is called too late (after the reclaiming has been performed).
Drivers with large amuont of reclaimable memory is expected to be
released them at an early age of memory pressure;
- The notifier callback isn't aware of the oom contrains;
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/12/314
This patch replaces the virtio-balloon oom notifier with a shrinker
to release balloon pages on memory pressure. Users can set the amount of
memory pages to release each time a shrinker_scan is called via the
module parameter balloon_pages_to_shrink, and the default amount is 256
pages. Historically, the feature VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_DEFLATE_ON_OOM has
been used to release balloon pages on OOM. We continue to use this
feature bit for the shrinker, so the shrinker is only registered when
this feature bit has been negotiated with host.
Do you have any numbers for how does this work in practice?
It works in this way: for example, we can set the parameter,
balloon_pages_to_shrink, to shrink 1GB memory once shrink scan is called.
Now, we have a 8GB guest, and we balloon out 7GB. When shrink scan is
called, the balloon driver will get back 1GB memory and give them back to
mm, then the ballooned memory becomes 6GB.
When the shrinker scan is called the second time, another 1GB will be given
back to mm. So the ballooned pages are given back to mm gradually.
Let's say
you have a medium page cache workload which triggers kswapd to do a
light reclaim? Hardcoded shrinking sounds quite dubious to me but I have
no idea how people expect this to work. Shouldn't this be more
adaptive? How precious are those pages anyway?
Those pages are given to host to use usually because the guest has enough
free memory, and host doesn't want to waste those pieces of memory as they
are not used by this guest. When the guest needs them, it is reasonable that
the guest has higher priority to take them back.
But I'm not sure if there would be a more adaptive approach than "gradually
giving back as the guest wants more".
I am not sure I follow. Let me be more specific. Say you have a trivial
stream IO triggering reclaim to recycle clean page cache. This will
invoke slab shrinkers as well. Do you really want to drop your batch of
pages on each invocation? Doesn't that remove them very quickly? Just
try to dd if=large_file of=/dev/null and see how your pages are
disappearing. Shrinkers usually scale the number of objects they are
going to reclaim based on the memory pressure (aka targer to be
reclaimed).
Thanks, I think it looks better to make it more adaptive. I'll send out
a new version for review.
Best,
Wei
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
