linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
	lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v5)
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:50:26 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090313134548.AF50.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090313132426.AF4D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

> > > I have two objection to this.
> > > 
> > > - "if (!order || !did_some_progress)" mean no call try_to_free_pages()
> > >   in order>0 and did_some_progress>0 case.
> > >   but mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim() don't have lumpy reclaim.
> > >   then, it break high order reclaim.
> > 
> > I am sending a fix for this right away. Thanks, the check should be
> > if (order || !did_some_progress)
> 
> No.
> 
> it isn't enough.
> after is does, order-1 allocation case twrice reclaim (soft limit shrinking
> and normal try_to_free_pages()).
> then, order-1 reclaim makes slower about 2 times.
> 
> unfortunately, order-1 allocation is very frequent. it is used for
> kernel stack.

in normal order-1 reclaim is:

1. try_to_free_pages()
2. get_page_from_freelist()
3. retry if order-1 page don't exist

Coundn't you use the same logic?

> > > - in global reclaim view, foreground reclaim and background reclaim's
> > >   reclaim rate is about 1:9 typically.
> > >   then, kswapd reclaim the pages by global lru order before proceccing
> > >   this logic.
> > >   IOW, this soft limit is not SOFT.
> > 
> > It depends on what you mean by soft. I call them soft since they are
> > imposed only when there is contention. If you mean kswapd runs more
> > often than direct reclaim, that is true, but it does not impact this
> > code extensively since the high water mark is a very small compared to
> > the pages present on the system.
> 
> No.
> 
> My point is, contention case kswapd wakeup. and kswapd reclaim by
> global lru order before soft limit shrinking.
> Therefore, In typical usage, mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim() almost
> don't call properly.
> 
> soft limit shrinking should run before processing global reclaim.

Do you have the reason of disliking call from kswapd ?



--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-13  4:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-12 17:56 [PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v5) Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 17:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] Memory controller soft limit documentation (v5) Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 17:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] Memory controller soft limit interface (v5) Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 22:59   ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-13  4:58     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 17:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] Memory controller soft limit organize cgroups (v5) Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 23:04   ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-13  5:03     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  0:47   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  5:04     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  5:22       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  8:20         ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  6:59   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  7:09     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 17:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention (v5) Balbir Singh
2009-03-12 23:34   ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-13  7:53     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  1:36   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  4:13     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  4:31       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  4:50         ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2009-03-13  5:07           ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  6:54             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  7:03               ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  7:17                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  7:26                   ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  8:37                     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  5:26           ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  5:34             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-03-13  4:58         ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  6:51   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  7:15     ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  8:41       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  7:02 ` [PATCH 0/4] Memory controller soft limit patches (v5) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  7:07   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-03-13  7:15     ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-13  7:29       ` Balbir Singh
2009-03-13  7:18     ` Balbir Singh

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=20090313134548.AF50.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=yamamoto@valinux.co.jp \
    /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