linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] mm: use watermak checks for __GFP_REPEAT high order allocations
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:18:25 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151120091825.GD16698@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1511191515170.17510@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Thu 19-11-15 15:17:35, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -3167,24 +3166,21 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> >  
> >  	/*
> >  	 * Do not retry high order allocations unless they are __GFP_REPEAT
> > -	 * and even then do not retry endlessly unless explicitly told so
> > +	 * unless explicitly told so.
> >  	 */
> > -	pages_reclaimed += did_some_progress;
> > -	if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) {
> > -		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) &&
> > -		   (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_REPEAT) || pages_reclaimed >= (1<<order)))
> > -			goto noretry;
> > -
> > -		if (did_some_progress)
> > -			goto retry;
> > -	}
> > +	if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER &&
> > +			!(gfp_mask & (__GFP_REPEAT|__GFP_NOFAIL)))
> > +		goto noretry;
> 
> Who is allocating order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER with __GFP_REPEAT and 
> would be affected by this change?

E.g. hugetlb pages. I have tested this in my testing scenario 3.

> >  
> >  	/*
> >  	 * Be optimistic and consider all pages on reclaimable LRUs as usable
> >  	 * but make sure we converge to OOM if we cannot make any progress after
> >  	 * multiple consecutive failed attempts.
> > +	 * Costly __GFP_REPEAT allocations might have made a progress but this
> > +	 * doesn't mean their order will become available due to high fragmentation
> > +	 * so do not reset the backoff for them
> >  	 */
> > -	if (did_some_progress)
> > +	if (did_some_progress && order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
> >  		stall_backoff = 0;
> >  	else
> >  		stall_backoff = min(stall_backoff+1, MAX_STALL_BACKOFF); 
> 
> This makes sense if there are high-order users of __GFP_REPEAT since 
> only using a number of pages reclaimed by itself isn't helpful.

Yes, that was my thinking

Thanks!

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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:[~2015-11-20  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-18 13:03 [RFC 0/3] OOM detection rework v2 Michal Hocko
2015-11-18 13:03 ` [RFC 1/3] mm, oom: refactor oom detection Michal Hocko
2015-11-19 23:01   ` David Rientjes
2015-11-20  9:06     ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-20 23:27       ` David Rientjes
2015-11-23  9:41         ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-23 18:24           ` Johannes Weiner
2015-11-24 10:03             ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-18 13:03 ` [RFC 2/3] mm: throttle on IO only when there are too many dirty and writeback pages Michal Hocko
2015-11-19 23:12   ` David Rientjes
2015-11-20  9:15     ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-18 13:04 ` [RFC 3/3] mm: use watermak checks for __GFP_REPEAT high order allocations Michal Hocko
2015-11-19 23:17   ` David Rientjes
2015-11-20  9:18     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2015-11-20 23:33       ` David Rientjes
2015-11-23  9:46         ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-18 16:21 ` [RFC 0/3] OOM detection rework v2 Linus Torvalds
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-12-01 12:56 [RFC 0/3] OOM detection rework v3 Michal Hocko
2015-12-01 12:56 ` [RFC 3/3] mm: use watermak checks for __GFP_REPEAT high order allocations Michal Hocko
2015-12-02  7:07   ` Hillf Danton
2015-12-02  8:52     ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-29 15:17 RFC: OOM detection rework v1 mhocko
2015-10-29 15:17 ` [RFC 3/3] mm: use watermak checks for __GFP_REPEAT high order allocations mhocko

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=20151120091825.GD16698@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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