Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1323685
| From | Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback |
| Date | 2016-02-02 02:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qXxDI-34V-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qWmU3-7SX-43@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWosO-BF-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qXnbn-3DE-39@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2016/2/1 21:53, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 10:03:52PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>> Since the root cause is that fallbacks might frequently split order-2 >>> and order-3 pages of the other migration types. This patch tweaks >>> fallback mechanism to avoid splitting order-2 and order-3 pages. while >>> fallbacks happen, if the largest feasible pages are less than or queal to >>> COSTLY_ORDER, i.e. 3, then try to select the smallest feasible pages. The >>> reason why fallbacks prefer the largest feasiable pages is to increase >>> fallback efficiency since fallbacks are likely to happen again. By >>> stealing the largest feasible pages, it could reduce the oppourtunities >>> of antoher fallback. Besides, it could make consecutive allocations more >>> approximate to each other and make system less fragment. However, if the >>> largest feasible pages are less than or equal to order-3, fallbacks might >>> split it and make the upcoming order-3 page allocations fail. >> >> In theory I don't see immediately why preferring smaller pages for >> fallback should be a clear win. If it's Unmovable allocations stealing >> from Movable pageblocks, the allocations will spread over larger areas >> instead of being grouped together. Maybe, for Movable allocations >> stealing from Unmovable allocations, preferring smallest might make >> sense and be safe, as any extra fragmentation is fixable bycompaction. > > I strongly agree that spreading the fallback allocations over a larger > area is likely to have a negative impact. Given the age of the kernel > being tested, it would make sense to either rebase or at the very last > backport the patches that affect watermark calculations and the > treatment of high-order pages. > Is it the feature of MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC? Thanks, Xishi Qiu
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback ChengYi He <chengyihetaipei@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 20:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-01-29 22:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> - 2016-01-30 11:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-02-01 15:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] avoid external fragmentation related to migration fallback Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> - 2016-02-02 02:10 +0100
csiph-web