linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, reclaim: make should_continue_reclaim perform dryrun detection
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 09:58:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b4dbe25f-4499-af28-94bb-d12147505326@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0d31cc14-13cd-13e0-cf2d-dd8a8d3049ff@suse.cz>

On 8/5/19 3:57 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 8/5/19 10:42 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 8/3/19 12:39 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>> From: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
>>>
>>> Address the issue of should_continue_reclaim continuing true too often
>>> for __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL attempts when !nr_reclaimed and nr_scanned.
>>> This could happen during hugetlb page allocation causing stalls for
>>> minutes or hours.
>>>
>>> We can stop reclaiming pages if compaction reports it can make a progress.
>>> A code reshuffle is needed to do that.
>>
>>> And it has side-effects, however,
>>> with allocation latencies in other cases but that would come at the cost
>>> of potential premature reclaim which has consequences of itself.
>>
>> Based on Mel's longer explanation, can we clarify the wording here? e.g.:
>>
>> There might be side-effect for other high-order allocations that would
>> potentially benefit from more reclaim before compaction for them to be
>> faster and less likely to stall, but the consequences of
>> premature/over-reclaim are considered worse.
>>
>>> We can also bail out of reclaiming pages if we know that there are not
>>> enough inactive lru pages left to satisfy the costly allocation.
>>>
>>> We can give up reclaiming pages too if we see dryrun occur, with the
>>> certainty of plenty of inactive pages. IOW with dryrun detected, we are
>>> sure we have reclaimed as many pages as we could.
>>>
>>> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
>>> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
>>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
>>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
>>> Tested-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
>>> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
>>
>> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
>> I will send some followup cleanup.
> 
> How about this?
> ----8<----
> From 0040b32462587171ad22395a56699cc036ad483f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:49:40 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] mm, reclaim: cleanup should_continue_reclaim()
> 
> After commit "mm, reclaim: make should_continue_reclaim perform dryrun
> detection", closer look at the function shows, that nr_reclaimed == 0 means
> the function will always return false. And since non-zero nr_reclaimed implies
> non_zero nr_scanned, testing nr_scanned serves no purpose, and so does the
> testing for __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL.
> 
> This patch thus cleans up the function to test only !nr_reclaimed upfront, and
> remove the __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL test and nr_scanned parameter completely.
> Comment is also updated, explaining that approximating "full LRU list has been
> scanned" with nr_scanned == 0 didn't really work.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

Acked-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>

Would you like me to add this to the series, or do you want to send later?
-- 
Mike Kravetz

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-05 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-02 22:39 [PATCH 0/3] address hugetlb page allocation stalls Mike Kravetz
2019-08-02 22:39 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm, reclaim: make should_continue_reclaim perform dryrun detection Mike Kravetz
2019-08-05  8:42   ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-08-05 10:57     ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-08-05 16:58       ` Mike Kravetz [this message]
2019-08-05 18:34         ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-08-05 16:54     ` Mike Kravetz
2019-08-02 22:39 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm, compaction: raise compaction priority after it withdrawns Mike Kravetz
2019-08-05  9:14   ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-08-02 22:39 ` [PATCH 3/3] hugetlbfs: don't retry when pool page allocations start to fail Mike Kravetz
2019-08-05  9:28   ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-08-05 17:12     ` Mike Kravetz

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=b4dbe25f-4499-af28-94bb-d12147505326@oracle.com \
    --to=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hdanton@sina.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, reclaim: make should_continue_reclaim perform dryrun detection' \
    /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

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).