Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1500828
| From | Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation |
| Date | 2016-10-14 13:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ss8nv-dl-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <srJfr-Vf-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <srJfr-Vf-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <srKlc-1y8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <srZtT-2Sz-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 10/14/2016 03:26 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:12:10AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> On 10/13/2016 10:08 AM, js1304@gmail.com wrote: >> >From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> >> > >> >When we try to find freepage in fallback buddy list, we always serach >> >the largest one. This would help for fragmentation if we process >> >unmovable/reclaimable allocation request because it could cause permanent >> >fragmentation on movable pageblock and spread out such allocations would >> >cause more fragmentation. But, movable allocation request is >> >rather different. It would be simply freed or migrated so it doesn't >> >contribute to fragmentation on the other pageblock. In this case, it would >> >be better not to break the precious highest order freepage so we need to >> >search the smallest freepage first. >> >> I've also pondered this, but then found a lower hanging fruit that >> should be hopefully clear win and mitigate most cases of breaking >> high-order pages unnecessarily: >> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=147582914330198&w=2 > > Yes, I agree with that change. That's the similar patch what I tried > before. > > "mm/page_alloc: don't break highest order freepage if steal" > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143011930520417&w=2 Ah, indeed, I forgot about it and had to rediscover :) > >> >> So I would try that first, and then test your patch on top? In your >> patch there's a risk that we make it harder for >> unmovable/reclaimable pageblocks to become movable again (we start >> with the smallest page which means there's lower chance that >> move_freepages_block() will convert more than half of the block). > > Indeed, but, with your "count movable pages when stealing", risk would > disappear. :) Hmm, but that counting is only triggered when we attempt to steal whole pageblock. For movable allocation, can_steal_fallback() allows that only for (order >= pageblock_order / 2), and since your patch makes "order" as small as possible for movable allocations, the chances are lower? >> And Johannes's report seems to be about a regression in exactly this >> aspect of the heuristics. > > Even if your change slows down the breaking high order freepage, but, > it would provide just a small delay to break. High order freepage > would be broken soon and we cannot prevent to decrease high order > freepage in the system. With my approach, high order freepage would > stay longer time. > > For Johannes case, my approach doesn't aim at recovering from that > situation. Instead, it tries to prevent such situation that > migratetype of pageblock is changed. > > Thanks. >
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation js1304@gmail.com - 2016-10-13 10:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-10-13 11:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-10-14 03:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-10-14 13:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: use smallest fallback page first in movable allocation Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-10-26 06:50 +0200
csiph-web