Re: Low TCP throughput due to vmpressure with swap enabled
From: Ivan Babrou <hidden>
Date: 2022-11-23 01:28:41
Also in:
cgroups, linux-mm, lkml
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 2:11 PM Ivan Babrou [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 12:05 PM Johannes Weiner [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 04:53:43PM -0800, Ivan Babrou wrote:quoted
Hello, We have observed a negative TCP throughput behavior from the following commit: * 8e8ae645249b mm: memcontrol: hook up vmpressure to socket pressure It landed back in 2016 in v4.5, so it's not exactly a new issue. The crux of the issue is that in some cases with swap present the workload can be unfairly throttled in terms of TCP throughput.Thanks for the detailed analysis, Ivan. Originally, we pushed back on sockets only when regular page reclaim had completely failed and we were about to OOM. This patch was an attempt to be smarter about it and equalize pressure more smoothly between socket memory, file cache, anonymous pages. After a recent discussion with Shakeel, I'm no longer quite sure the kernel is the right place to attempt this sort of balancing. It kind of depends on the workload which type of memory is more imporant. And your report shows that vmpressure is a flawed mechanism to implement this, anyway. So I'm thinking we should delete the vmpressure thing, and go back to socket throttling only if an OOM is imminent. This is in line with what we do at the system level: sockets get throttled only after reclaim fails and we hit hard limits. It's then up to the users and sysadmin to allocate a reasonable amount of buffers given the overall memory budget. Cgroup accounting, limiting and OOM enforcement is still there for the socket buffers, so misbehaving groups will be contained either way. What do you think? Something like the below patch?The idea sounds very reasonable to me. I can't really speak for the patch contents with any sort of authority, but it looks ok to my non-expert eyes. There were some conflicts when cherry-picking this into v5.15. I think the only real one was for the "!sc->proactive" condition not being present there. For the rest I just accepted the incoming change. I'm going to be away from my work computer until December 5th, but I'll try to expedite my backported patch to a production machine today to confirm that it makes the difference. If I can get some approvals on my internal PRs, I should be able to provide the results by EOD tomorrow.
I tried the patch and something isn't right here.
With the patch applied I'm capped at ~120MB/s, which is a symptom of a
clamped window.
I can't find any sockets with memcg->socket_pressure = 1, but at the
same time I only see the following rcv_ssthresh assigned to sockets:
$ sudo ss -tim dport 6443 | fgrep rcv_ssthresh | sed
's/.*rcv_ssthresh://' | awk '{ print $1 }' | sort -n | uniq -c | sort
-n | tail
1 64076
181 65495
1456 5792
16531 64088
* 64088 is the default value
* 5792 is 4 * advmss (clamped)
Compare this to a machine without the patch but with
cgroup.memory=nosocket in cmdline:
$ sudo ss -tim dport 6443 | fgrep rcv_ssthresh | sed
's/.*rcv_ssthresh://' | awk '{ print $1 }' | sort -n | uniq -c | sort
-n | tail
8 2806862
8 3777338
8 72776
8 86068
10 2024018
12 3777354
23 91172
29 66984
101 65495
5439 64088
There aren't any clamped sockets here and there are many different
rcv_ssthresh values.