linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: hugetlb page migration vs. overcommit
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:28:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171122152832.iayefrlxbugphorp@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)

Hi,
is there any reason why we enforce the overcommit limit during hugetlb
pages migration? It's in alloc_huge_page_node->__alloc_buddy_huge_page
path. I am wondering whether this is really an intentional behavior.
The page migration allocates a page just temporarily so we should be
able to go over the overcommit limit for the migration duration. The
reason I am asking is that hugetlb pages tend to be utilized usually
(otherwise the memory would be just wasted and pool shrunk) but then
the migration simply fails which breaks memory hotplug and other
migration dependent functionality which is quite suboptimal. You can
workaround that by increasing the overcommit limit.

Why don't we simply migrate as long as we are able to allocate the
target hugetlb page? I have a half baked patch to remove this
restriction, would there be an opposition to do something like that?
-- 
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:[~2017-11-22 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-22 15:28 Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-11-22 19:11 ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-23  9:21   ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-27  6:27   ` Naoya Horiguchi
2017-11-28 10:19 ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-28 14:12   ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-28 14:12     ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] mm, hugetlb: unify core page allocation accounting and initialization Michal Hocko
2017-11-28 21:34       ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-29  6:57         ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29 19:09           ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-28 14:12     ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] mm, hugetlb: do not rely on overcommit limit during migration Michal Hocko
2017-11-29  1:39       ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-29  7:17         ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29  9:22       ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29  9:40         ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29 11:23         ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29 19:52         ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-30  7:57           ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-30 19:35             ` Mike Kravetz
2017-11-30 19:57               ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-30 20:06                 ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29  9:51       ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-29 11:33       ` [PATCH RFC v2 " Michal Hocko

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=20171122152832.iayefrlxbugphorp@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
    /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