[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] [RFC] mm/shrinker: Add a shrinker flag to always shrink a bit
daniel at ffwll.ch
Wed Sep 18 03:56:31 PDT 2013
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:38:23PM +0200, Knut Petersen wrote:
> On 18.09.2013 11:10, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Just now I prepared a patch changing the same function in vmscan.c
> >Also, this needs to be rebased to the new shrinker api in 3.12, I
> >simply haven't rolled my trees forward yet.
> Well, you should. Since commit 81e49f shrinker->count_objects might be
> set to SHRINK_STOP, causing shrink_slab_node() to complain loud and often:
> [ 1908.234595] shrink_slab: i915_gem_inactive_scan+0x0/0x9c negative objects to delete nr=-xxxxxxxxx
> The kernel emitted a few thousand log lines like the one quoted above during the
> last few days on my system.
> >diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> >index 2cff0d4..d81f6e0 100644
> >--- a/mm/vmscan.c
> >+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> >@@ -254,6 +254,10 @@ unsigned long shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrink,
> > total_scan = max_pass;
> > }
> >+ /* Always try to shrink a bit to make forward progress. */
> >+ if (shrinker->evicts_to_page_lru)
> >+ total_scan = max_t(long, total_scan, batch_size);
> At that place the error message is already emitted.
> > /*
> > * We need to avoid excessive windup on filesystem shrinkers
> > * due to large numbers of GFP_NOFS allocations causing the
> Have a look at the attached patch. It fixes my problem with the erroneous/misleading
> error messages, and I think it´s right to just bail out early if SHRINK_STOP is found.
> Do you agree ?
Looking at the patch which introduced these error message for you, which
changed the ->count_objects return value from 0 to SHRINK_STOP your patch
below to treat 0 and SHRINK_STOP equally simply reverts the functional
I don't think that's the intention behind SHRINK_STOP. But if it's the
right think to do we better revert the offending commit directly. And
since I lack clue I think that's a call for core mm guys to make.
> From 75ae570ce7b0bb6b40c76beb18fc075e9af3127a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen at t-online.de>
> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:06:33 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: respect SHRINK_STOP in shrink_slab_node()
> Since commit 81e49f811404f428a9d9a63295a0c267e802fa12
> i915_gem_inactive_count() might return SHRINK_STOP.
> Unfortunately SHRINK_STOP is not handled propperly in
> shrink_slab_node(), causing a system log cluttered with
> kernel error messages complaining about "negative objects
> to delete".
> I think the proper way of handling SHRINK_STOP is obvious,
> we should obey ;-)
> Signed-off-by: Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen at t-online.de>
> mm/vmscan.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 8ed1b77..b1e6f0d 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -244,6 +244,8 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl, struct shrinker *shrinker,
> max_pass = shrinker->count_objects(shrinker, shrinkctl);
> if (max_pass == 0)
> return 0;
> + if (max_pass == SHRINK_STOP)
> + return 0;
> * copy the current shrinker scan count into a local variable
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
More information about the dri-devel