Re: [PATCH] mm: readahead: improve mmap_miss heuristic for concurrent faults
From: David Hildenbrand
Date: Tue Aug 19 2025 - 03:34:06 EST
On 15.08.25 20:32, Roman Gushchin wrote:
If two or more threads of an application faulting on the same folio,
the mmap_miss counter can be decreased multiple times. It breaks the
mmap_miss heuristic and keeps the readahead enabled even under extreme
levels of memory pressure.
It happens often if file folios backing a multi-threaded application
are getting evicted and re-faulted.
Fix it by skipping decreasing mmap_miss if the folio is locked.
This change was evaluated on several hundred thousands hosts in Google's
production over a couple of weeks. The number of containers being
stuck in a vicious reclaim cycle for a long time was reduced several
fold (~10-20x), as well as the overall fleet-wide cpu time spent in
direct memory reclaim was meaningfully reduced. No regressions were
observed.
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx
---
mm/filemap.c | 14 +++++++++++---
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index c21e98657e0b..983ba1019674 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -3324,9 +3324,17 @@ static struct file *do_async_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf,
if (vmf->vma->vm_flags & VM_RAND_READ || !ra->ra_pages)
return fpin;
- mmap_miss = READ_ONCE(ra->mmap_miss);
- if (mmap_miss)
- WRITE_ONCE(ra->mmap_miss, --mmap_miss);
+ /*
+ * If the folio is locked, we're likely racing against another fault.
+ * Don't touch the mmap_miss counter to avoid decreasing it multiple
+ * times for a single folio and break the balance with mmap_miss
+ * increase in do_sync_mmap_readahead().
+ */
+ if (likely(!folio_test_locked(folio))) {
+ mmap_miss = READ_ONCE(ra->mmap_miss);
+ if (mmap_miss)
+ WRITE_ONCE(ra->mmap_miss, --mmap_miss);
+ }
Makes sense to me, bud I am no readahead expert.
--
Cheers
David / dhildenb