Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1596607 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-10 05:30 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-03-13 13:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 5 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> - 2017-03-10 05:30 +0100
Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2017-03-10 08:40 +0100
Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> - 2017-03-10 11:00 +0100
Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2017-03-13 11:00 +0100
Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> - 2017-03-13 13:20 +0100
| From | Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-10 05:30 +0100 |
| Subject | [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page |
| Message-ID | <tjklI-6LR-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
If the migrate target is a large free page and we ignore suitable,
it may not good for defrag. So move the ignore block suitable after
check large free page.
Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com>
---
mm/compaction.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
index 0fdfde0..4bf2a5d 100644
--- a/mm/compaction.c
+++ b/mm/compaction.c
@@ -991,9 +991,6 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
struct page *page)
{
- if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
- return true;
-
/* If the page is a large free page, then disallow migration */
if (PageBuddy(page)) {
/*
@@ -1005,6 +1002,9 @@ static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
return false;
}
+ if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
+ return true;
+
/* If the block is MIGRATE_MOVABLE or MIGRATE_CMA, allow migration */
if (migrate_async_suitable(get_pageblock_migratetype(page)))
return true;
--
1.7.12.4
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-10 08:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page |
| Message-ID | <tjnjz-qU-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1596607 |
On 03/10/2017 05:20 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
> If the migrate target is a large free page and we ignore suitable,
> it may not good for defrag. So move the ignore block suitable after
> check large free page.
Right. But in practice I expect close to no impact, because direct
compaction shouldn't have to be called if there's a >=pageblock_order
page already available.
> Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com>
> ---
> mm/compaction.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 0fdfde0..4bf2a5d 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -991,9 +991,6 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
> struct page *page)
> {
> - if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
> - return true;
> -
> /* If the page is a large free page, then disallow migration */
> if (PageBuddy(page)) {
> /*
> @@ -1005,6 +1002,9 @@ static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
> return false;
> }
>
> + if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
> + return true;
> +
> /* If the block is MIGRATE_MOVABLE or MIGRATE_CMA, allow migration */
> if (migrate_async_suitable(get_pageblock_migratetype(page)))
> return true;
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-10 11:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page |
| Message-ID | <tjpv5-27X-47@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1596696 |
Hi Vlastimil,
Thanks for comment.
On 2017/3/10 15:30, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 03/10/2017 05:20 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>> If the migrate target is a large free page and we ignore suitable,
>> it may not good for defrag. So move the ignore block suitable after
>> check large free page.
>
> Right. But in practice I expect close to no impact, because direct
> compaction shouldn't have to be called if there's a >=pageblock_order
> page already available.
>
Maybe you are right and this change is just based on logical analyses.
Presently, only in direct compaction, we increase the compaction priority,
and ignore suitable at MIN_COMPACT_PRIORITY. I have a silly question, can
we do the similar thing in kcompactd? maybe by doing most work in kcompactd,
we can get better perf of slow path.
Thanks
Yisheng Xie
>> Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> mm/compaction.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
>> index 0fdfde0..4bf2a5d 100644
>> --- a/mm/compaction.c
>> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
>> @@ -991,9 +991,6 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
>> static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
>> struct page *page)
>> {
>> - if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
>> - return true;
>> -
>> /* If the page is a large free page, then disallow migration */
>> if (PageBuddy(page)) {
>> /*
>> @@ -1005,6 +1002,9 @@ static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> + if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
>> + return true;
>> +
>> /* If the block is MIGRATE_MOVABLE or MIGRATE_CMA, allow migration */
>> if (migrate_async_suitable(get_pageblock_migratetype(page)))
>> return true;
>>
>
>
> .
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 11:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page |
| Message-ID | <tkuVI-74H-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1596947 |
On 03/10/2017 10:53 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
> Hi Vlastimil,
>
> Thanks for comment.
> On 2017/3/10 15:30, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 03/10/2017 05:20 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>>> If the migrate target is a large free page and we ignore suitable,
>>> it may not good for defrag. So move the ignore block suitable after
>>> check large free page.
>>
>> Right. But in practice I expect close to no impact, because direct
>> compaction shouldn't have to be called if there's a >=pageblock_order
>> page already available.
>>
> Maybe you are right and this change is just based on logical analyses.
I'm not opposing the change, it might be better for future-proofing the
function, just pointing out that it most likely won't have any visible
effect right now.
> Presently, only in direct compaction, we increase the compaction priority,
> and ignore suitable at MIN_COMPACT_PRIORITY. I have a silly question, can
> we do the similar thing in kcompactd? maybe by doing most work in kcompactd,
> we can get better perf of slow path.
That would need a very good evaluation at the very least. Migrating
pages into pageblocks other than movable ones brings the danger of later
unmovable/reclaimable allocations having to fallback to movable
pageblocks and causing permanent fragmentation. For direct compaction we
decided that it's better to risk permanent fragmentation than a
premature OOM, but for kcompactd there doesn't seem to be such
compelling reason.
> Thanks
> Yisheng Xie
>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>> mm/compaction.c | 6 +++---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
>>> index 0fdfde0..4bf2a5d 100644
>>> --- a/mm/compaction.c
>>> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
>>> @@ -991,9 +991,6 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
>>> static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
>>> struct page *page)
>>> {
>>> - if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
>>> - return true;
>>> -
>>> /* If the page is a large free page, then disallow migration */
>>> if (PageBuddy(page)) {
>>> /*
>>> @@ -1005,6 +1002,9 @@ static bool suitable_migration_target(struct compact_control *cc,
>>> return false;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + if (cc->ignore_block_suitable)
>>> + return true;
>>> +
>>> /* If the block is MIGRATE_MOVABLE or MIGRATE_CMA, allow migration */
>>> if (migrate_async_suitable(get_pageblock_migratetype(page)))
>>> return true;
>>>
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 13:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC] mm/compaction: ignore block suitable after check large free page |
| Message-ID | <tkx7c-nh-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1599161 |
Hi Vlastimil, Thanks for comment. On 2017/3/13 17:51, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 03/10/2017 10:53 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote: >> Hi Vlastimil, >> >> Thanks for comment. >> On 2017/3/10 15:30, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>> On 03/10/2017 05:20 AM, Yisheng Xie wrote: >>>> If the migrate target is a large free page and we ignore suitable, >>>> it may not good for defrag. So move the ignore block suitable after >>>> check large free page. >>> >>> Right. But in practice I expect close to no impact, because direct >>> compaction shouldn't have to be called if there's a >=pageblock_order >>> page already available. >>> >> Maybe you are right and this change is just based on logical analyses. > > I'm not opposing the change, it might be better for future-proofing the > function, just pointing out that it most likely won't have any visible > effect right now. Get it, maybe I should put these in the change log :) > >> Presently, only in direct compaction, we increase the compaction priority, >> and ignore suitable at MIN_COMPACT_PRIORITY. I have a silly question, can >> we do the similar thing in kcompactd? maybe by doing most work in kcompactd, >> we can get better perf of slow path. > > That would need a very good evaluation at the very least. Migrating > pages into pageblocks other than movable ones brings the danger of later > unmovable/reclaimable allocations having to fallback to movable > pageblocks and causing permanent fragmentation. For direct compaction we > decided that it's better to risk permanent fragmentation than a > premature OOM, but for kcompactd there doesn't seem to be such > compelling reason. Thanks for kindly explain. > >> Thanks >> Yisheng Xie
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web