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 14:34:09 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090313142814.AF4A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090313052653.GG16897@balbir.in.ibm.com>

> * KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> [2009-03-13 13:50:26]:
> 
> > > > > 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?
> 
> Sorry, forgot to answer this question earlier.
> 
> I assume that by order-1 you mean 2 pages (2^1).

Yes, almost architecutre's kernel stack use 2 pages.


> Are you suggesting that if soft limit reclaim fails, we retry? Not
> sure if I understand your suggestion completely.

sorry. my last explanation is too poor.

if we need only 2pages, soft_limit_shrink() typically success
reclaim it.
then

1. mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim()
2. get_page_from_freelist() if mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim() return >0.
3. goto got_pg if if get_page_from_freelist() is successed.
4. try_to_free_pages()
5. get_page_from_freelist() if try_to_free_pages() return >0.
6. goto 1 if order-1 page don't exist

obiously, this logic make slower more higher order because
(2) is often fail in higher order.
but that's ok. higher order reclaim is very slow. additional
overhead don't observe (maybe).

What do you think?



--
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  5:34 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
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 [this message]
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=20090313142814.AF4A.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