From: "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
To: "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "'Mel Gorman'" <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
"'Johannes Weiner'" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"'Vlastimil Babka'" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"'linux-kernel'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: Give up balancing node for high order allocations earlier
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:32:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <013d01d1dc07$33896860$9a9c3920$@alibaba-inc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160711152015.e3be8be7702fb0ca4625040d@linux-foundation.org>
> > To avoid excessive reclaim, we give up rebalancing for high order
> > allocations right after reclaiming enough pages.
>
> hm. What are the observed runtime effects of this change? Any testing
> results?
>
This work was based on Mel's work, Sir,
"[PATCH 00/27] Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v7".
In "[PATCH 06/27] mm, vmscan: Make kswapd reclaim in terms of nodes",
fragmentation detection is introduced to avoid excessive reclaim. We bail
out of balancing for high-order allocations if the pages reclaimed at the
__current__ reclaim priority are two times more than required.
In this work we give up reclaiming for high-order allocations if the
__total__ number of pages reclaimed, from the first priority to the
current priority, is more than needed, and in net result we reclaim less
pages.
Given " [PATCH 00/34] Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
is delivered, I will send this work if necessary, after Mel's work landing
in the -mm tree.
thanks
Hillf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-12 6:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-29 5:42 [PATCH] mm, vmscan: Give up balancing node for high order allocations earlier Hillf Danton
2016-07-11 22:20 ` Andrew Morton
2016-07-12 6:32 ` Hillf Danton [this message]
2016-07-12 8:33 ` Mel Gorman
2016-07-12 8:48 ` Hillf Danton
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='013d01d1dc07$33896860$9a9c3920$@alibaba-inc.com' \
--to=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).