From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrea Argangeli <andrea@kernel.org>,
Zi Yan <zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu>,
Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@profihost.ag>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] thp nodereclaim fixes
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:03:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180925120326.24392-1-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)
Hi,
this has been brought up by Andrea [1] and he proposed two different
fixes for the regression. I have proposed an alternative fix [2]. I have
changed my mind in the end because whatever fix we end up with it should
be backported to the stable trees so going with a minimalistic one is
preferred so I have got back to the Andrea's second proposed solution
[3] in the end. I have just reworded the changelog to reflect other bug
report with the stall information.
My primary concern about [3] was that the __GFP_THISNODE logic should be
placed in alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask which I've done on top of the
fix as a cleanup (patch 2) and it doesn't need to be backported to the
stable tree.
I am still not happy that the David's workload will regress as a result
but we should really focus on the default behavior and come with a more
robust solution for specialized one for those who have more restrictive
NUMA preferences. I am thinking about a new numa policy that would mimic
node reclaim behavior and I am willing to work on that but we really
have to fix the regression first and that is the patch 1.
Thoughts, alternative patches?
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180820032204.9591-1-aarcange@redhat.com
[2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180830064732.GA2656@dhcp22.suse.cz
[3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180820032640.9896-2-aarcange@redhat.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrea Argangeli <andrea@kernel.org>,
Zi Yan <zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu>,
Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@profihost.ag>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] thp nodereclaim fixes
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 14:03:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180925120326.24392-1-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)
Hi,
this has been brought up by Andrea [1] and he proposed two different
fixes for the regression. I have proposed an alternative fix [2]. I have
changed my mind in the end because whatever fix we end up with it should
be backported to the stable trees so going with a minimalistic one is
preferred so I have got back to the Andrea's second proposed solution
[3] in the end. I have just reworded the changelog to reflect other bug
report with the stall information.
My primary concern about [3] was that the __GFP_THISNODE logic should be
placed in alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask which I've done on top of the
fix as a cleanup (patch 2) and it doesn't need to be backported to the
stable tree.
I am still not happy that the David's workload will regress as a result
but we should really focus on the default behavior and come with a more
robust solution for specialized one for those who have more restrictive
NUMA preferences. I am thinking about a new numa policy that would mimic
node reclaim behavior and I am willing to work on that but we really
have to fix the regression first and that is the patch 1.
Thoughts, alternative patches?
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180820032204.9591-1-aarcange@redhat.com
[2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180830064732.GA2656@dhcp22.suse.cz
[3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180820032640.9896-2-aarcange@redhat.com
next reply other threads:[~2018-09-25 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-25 12:03 Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-09-25 12:03 ` [PATCH 0/2] thp nodereclaim fixes Michal Hocko
2018-09-25 12:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: thp: relax __GFP_THISNODE for MADV_HUGEPAGE mappings Michal Hocko
2018-09-25 12:03 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-25 12:20 ` Mel Gorman
2018-09-25 12:30 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-04 20:16 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-04 21:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-04 23:05 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-06 3:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-05 7:38 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-05 20:35 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-05 23:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-08 20:41 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-09 9:48 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-09 12:27 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-09 13:00 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-09 14:25 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-09 15:16 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-09 23:03 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-10 21:19 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-15 22:30 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-15 22:44 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-15 23:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-22 20:54 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-16 7:46 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-16 22:37 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-16 23:11 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-16 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-17 7:08 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-17 9:00 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-22 21:04 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-23 1:27 ` Zi Yan
2018-10-23 1:27 ` Zi Yan
2018-10-28 21:45 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-23 7:57 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-23 8:38 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-15 22:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-22 20:45 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-09 22:17 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-09 22:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-10 7:54 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-10 21:00 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-09 13:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-09 22:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-10-29 5:17 ` Balbir Singh
2018-10-29 9:00 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-29 9:42 ` Balbir Singh
2018-10-29 10:08 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-29 10:56 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2018-09-25 12:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, thp: consolidate THP gfp handling into alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask Michal Hocko
2018-09-25 12:03 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-26 13:30 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-09-26 14:17 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-26 14:22 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-19 2:11 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-19 8:06 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 13:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-24 23:17 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-25 4:56 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-25 16:14 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-25 16:18 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-25 16:45 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 13:15 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-22 13:30 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 13:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-22 13:46 ` Michal Hocko
2018-10-22 13:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-04 20:17 ` David Rientjes
2018-10-04 21:49 ` Zi Yan
2018-10-09 12:36 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-26 13:08 ` linux-mm@ archive on lore.kernel.org (Was: [PATCH 0/2] thp nodereclaim fixes) Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-09-26 13:14 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-26 22:22 ` Andrew Morton
2018-09-26 23:08 ` Mel Gorman
2018-09-27 0:47 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2018-09-26 15:25 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2018-09-27 11:30 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180925120326.24392-1-mhocko@kernel.org \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrea@kernel.org \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=s.priebe@profihost.ag \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.