From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (mail-pd0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742FA6B0069 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 02:10:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pd0-f177.google.com with SMTP id ft15so6119703pdb.22 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:10:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from lgemrelse6q.lge.com (LGEMRELSE6Q.lge.com. [156.147.1.121]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id gx7si14714385pac.213.2014.11.27.23.10.17 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 23:10:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 16:13:27 +0900 From: Joonsoo Kim Subject: [LSF/MM ATTEND] Improving CMA Message-ID: <20141128071327.GB11802@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> References: <5473E146.7000503@codeaurora.org> <20141127061204.GA6850@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141127061204.GA6850@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Laura Abbott Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, zhuhui@xiaomi.com, minchan@kernel.org, gioh.kim@lge.com, SeongJae Park , mgorman@suse.de On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:12:04PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:54:14PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote: > > There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various > > aspects of CMA. A sampling: > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623 > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2 > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549 > > > > As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but > > none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of > > this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest > > problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them. > > I also tried to solve problem from CMA, that is, reserved memory > utilization. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64 > > While playing that patchset, I found serious problem about free page > counting, so I stopped to develop it for a while and tried to fix it. > Now, it is fixed by me and I can continue my patchset. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/69 > > I heard that Minchan suggests new CMA zone like movable zone, and, I > think that it would be the way to go. But, it would be a long-term goal > and I'd like to solve utilization problem with my patchset for now. > It is the biggest issue and it already forces someone to develop > out of tree solution. It's not good that out of tree solution is used > more and more in the product so I'd like to fix it quickly at first > stage. > > I think that CMA have big potential. If we fix problems of CMA > completely, it can be used for many places. One such case in my mind > is hugetlb or THP. Until now, hugetlb uses reserved approach, that is > very inefficient. System administrator carefully set the number of > reserved hugepage according to whole system workload. And application > can't use it freely, because it is very limited and managed resource. > If we use CMA for hugetlb, we can easily allocate hugepage and > application can use hugepages more freely. > > Anyway, I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic. I change the subject according to LSF/MM attend request format. What I can do and why I'd like to attend is explained above. Sorry for noise. Thanks. -- 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: email@kvack.org