From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
Raghavendra D Prabhu <raghu.prabhu13@gmail.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: slub: Do not take expensive steps for SLUBs speculative high-order allocations
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:52:14 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105171251450.15604@router.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110517162256.GO5279@suse.de>
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > That is not what I meant. I would like more higher order allocations to
> > succeed. That does not mean that slubs allocation methods and flags passed
> > have to stay the same. You can change the slub behavior if it helps.
> >
>
> In this particular patch, the success rate for high order allocations
> would likely decrease in low memory conditions albeit the latency when
> calling the page allocator will be lower and the disruption to the
> system will be less (no copying or reclaim of pages). My expectation
> would be that it's cheaper for SLUB to fall back than compact memory
> or reclaim pages even if this means a slab page is smaller until more
> memory is free. However, if the "goodness" criteria is high order
> allocation success rate, the patch shouldn't be merged.
The criteria is certainly overall system performance and not a high order
allocation rate.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
Raghavendra D Prabhu <raghu.prabhu13@gmail.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: slub: Do not take expensive steps for SLUBs speculative high-order allocations
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:52:14 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105171251450.15604@router.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110517162256.GO5279@suse.de>
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > That is not what I meant. I would like more higher order allocations to
> > succeed. That does not mean that slubs allocation methods and flags passed
> > have to stay the same. You can change the slub behavior if it helps.
> >
>
> In this particular patch, the success rate for high order allocations
> would likely decrease in low memory conditions albeit the latency when
> calling the page allocator will be lower and the disruption to the
> system will be less (no copying or reclaim of pages). My expectation
> would be that it's cheaper for SLUB to fall back than compact memory
> or reclaim pages even if this means a slab page is smaller until more
> memory is free. However, if the "goodness" criteria is high order
> allocation success rate, the patch shouldn't be merged.
The criteria is certainly overall system performance and not a high order
allocation rate.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 119+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-13 14:03 [PATCH 0/4] Reduce impact to overall system of SLUB using high-order allocations V2 Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: vmscan: Correct use of pgdat_balanced in sleeping_prematurely Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-05-13 14:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-05-14 16:30 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-14 16:30 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: slub: Do not wake kswapd for SLUBs speculative high-order allocations Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 21:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-16 21:10 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-18 6:09 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-18 6:09 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-05-18 17:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-18 17:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: slub: Do not take expensive steps " Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 21:16 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-16 21:16 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 8:42 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 8:42 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 13:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-17 13:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 17:52 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2011-05-17 17:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-17 19:35 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 19:35 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 19:31 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-17 19:31 ` David Rientjes
2011-05-13 14:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmscan: If kswapd has been running too long, allow it to sleep Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-15 10:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-15 10:27 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-16 4:21 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-16 4:21 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-16 5:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 5:04 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:58 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 8:58 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 8:58 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 10:27 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 10:27 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 10:27 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 23:50 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-16 23:50 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 0:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 0:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 0:48 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-17 10:38 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 10:38 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 10:38 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 13:50 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-17 13:50 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-17 16:15 ` [PATCH] mm: vmscan: Correctly check if reclaimer should schedule during shrink_slab Mel Gorman
2011-05-17 16:15 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 0:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:45 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-19 0:03 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:03 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:03 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:09 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:09 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 0:09 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-19 11:36 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-19 11:36 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-20 0:06 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-20 0:06 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-20 0:06 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 4:19 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmscan: If kswapd has been running too long, allow it to sleep Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 4:19 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 7:39 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-18 7:39 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-18 4:09 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 4:09 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-18 1:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 1:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 5:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 5:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 5:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 6:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 6:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 22:55 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 22:55 ` Minchan Kim
2011-05-18 23:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 23:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:26 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 0:26 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18 9:57 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-18 9:57 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:45 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-16 14:30 ` Rik van Riel
2011-05-13 15:19 ` [PATCH 0/4] Reduce impact to overall system of SLUB using high-order allocations V2 James Bottomley
2011-05-13 15:19 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-13 15:19 ` James Bottomley
2011-05-13 15:52 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 15:52 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 15:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-13 15:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-13 15:43 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-13 15:43 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-14 8:34 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-14 8:34 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-16 8:37 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 8:37 ` Mel Gorman
2011-05-16 11:24 ` Colin Ian King
2011-05-16 11:24 ` Colin Ian King
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=alpine.DEB.2.00.1105171251450.15604@router.home \
--to=cl@linux.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=colin.king@canonical.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=raghu.prabhu13@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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.