linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Charan Teja Reddy <charante@codeaurora.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com,
	khalid.aziz@oracle.com, ngupta@nitingupta.dev,
	vinmenon@codeaurora.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] mm/compaction: correct deferral logic for proactive compaction
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 13:37:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <777bf9c5-82db-041b-55ee-6868ab78ef70@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1610972408-20986-1-git-send-email-charante@codeaurora.org>

On 1/18/21 1:20 PM, Charan Teja Reddy wrote:
> should_proactive_compact_node() returns true when sum of the
> weighted fragmentation score of all the zones in the node is greater
> than the wmark_high of compaction, which then triggers the proactive
> compaction that operates on the individual zones of the node. But
> proactive compaction runs on the zone only when its weighted
> fragmentation score is greater than wmark_low(=wmark_high - 10).
> 
> This means that the sum of the weighted fragmentation scores of all the
> zones can exceed the wmark_high but individual weighted fragmentation
> zone scores can still be less than wmark_low which makes the unnecessary
> trigger of the proactive compaction only to return doing nothing.
> 
> Issue with the return of proactive compaction with out even trying is
> its deferral. It is simply deferred for 1 << COMPACT_MAX_DEFER_SHIFT if
> the scores across the proactive compaction is same, thinking that
> compaction didn't make any progress but in reality it didn't even try.
> With the delay between successive retries for proactive compaction is
> 500msec, it can result into the deferral for ~30sec with out even trying
> the proactive compaction.
> 
> Test scenario is that: compaction_proactiveness=50 thus the wmark_low =
> 50 and wmark_high = 60. System have 2 zones(Normal and Movable) with
> sizes 5GB and 6GB respectively. After opening some apps on the android,
> the weighted fragmentation scores of these zones are 47 and 49
> respectively. Since the sum of these fragmentation scores are above the
> wmark_high which triggers the proactive compaction and there since the
> individual zones weighted fragmentation scores are below wmark_low, it
> returns without trying the proactive compaction. As a result the
> weighted fragmentation scores of the zones are still 47 and 49 which
> makes the existing logic to defer the compaction thinking that
> noprogress is made across the compaction.
> 
> Fix this by checking just zone fragmentation score, not the weighted, in
> __compact_finished() and use the zones weighted fragmentation score in
> fragmentation_score_node(). In the test case above, If the weighted
> average of is above wmark_high, then individual score (not adjusted) of
> atleast one zone has to be above wmark_high. Thus it avoids the
> unnecessary trigger and deferrals of the proactive compaction.
> 
> Fix-suggested-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Charan Teja Reddy <charante@codeaurora.org>

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

But I would move fragmentation_score_zone() above
fragmentation_score_zone_weighted(), so fragmentation_score_zone_weighted() can
call fragmentation_score_zone() instead of having two places with
extfrag_for_order(...).

Thanks.

> ---
> 
> Changes in V2: Addressed comments from vlastimil
> 
> Changes in V1: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1364646/
> 
>  mm/compaction.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index e5acb97..1b98427 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -1924,16 +1924,16 @@ static bool kswapd_is_running(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * A zone's fragmentation score is the external fragmentation wrt to the
> - * COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER scaled by the zone's size. It returns a value
> - * in the range [0, 100].
> + * A weighted zone's fragmentation score is the external fragmentation
> + * wrt to the COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER scaled by the zone's size. It
> + * returns a value in the range [0, 100].
>   *
>   * The scaling factor ensures that proactive compaction focuses on larger
>   * zones like ZONE_NORMAL, rather than smaller, specialized zones like
>   * ZONE_DMA32. For smaller zones, the score value remains close to zero,
>   * and thus never exceeds the high threshold for proactive compaction.
>   */
> -static unsigned int fragmentation_score_zone(struct zone *zone)
> +static unsigned int fragmentation_score_zone_weighted(struct zone *zone)
>  {
>  	unsigned long score;
>  
> @@ -1943,6 +1943,15 @@ static unsigned int fragmentation_score_zone(struct zone *zone)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> + * A zone's fragmentation score is the external fragmentation wrt to the
> + * COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER. It returns a value in the range [0, 100].
> + */
> +static unsigned int fragmentation_score_zone(struct zone *zone)
> +{
> +	return extfrag_for_order(zone, COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER);
> +}
> +
> +/*
>   * The per-node proactive (background) compaction process is started by its
>   * corresponding kcompactd thread when the node's fragmentation score
>   * exceeds the high threshold. The compaction process remains active till
> @@ -1958,7 +1967,7 @@ static unsigned int fragmentation_score_node(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>  		struct zone *zone;
>  
>  		zone = &pgdat->node_zones[zoneid];
> -		score += fragmentation_score_zone(zone);
> +		score += fragmentation_score_zone_weighted(zone);
>  	}
>  
>  	return score;
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-18 12:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-18 12:20 [PATCH V2] mm/compaction: correct deferral logic for proactive compaction Charan Teja Reddy
2021-01-18 12:37 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2021-01-18 12:41   ` Charan Teja Kalla

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=777bf9c5-82db-041b-55ee-6868ab78ef70@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=charante@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=khalid.aziz@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=ngupta@nitingupta.dev \
    --cc=vinmenon@codeaurora.org \
    /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).