linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch for-5.3 0/4] revert immediate fallback to remote hugepages
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 09:08:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190925070817.GH23050@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190909193020.GD2063@dhcp22.suse.cz>

Let me revive this thread as there was no follow up.

On Mon 09-09-19 21:30:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> I believe it would be the best to start by explaining why we do not see
> the same problem with order-0 requests. We do not enter the slow path
> and thus the memory reclaim if there is any other node to pass through
> watermakr as well right? So essentially we are relying on kswapd to keep
> nodes balanced so that allocation request can be satisfied from a local
> node. We do have kcompactd to do background compaction. Why do we want
> to rely on the direct compaction instead? What is the fundamental
> difference?

I am especially interested about this part. The more I think about this
the more I am convinced that the underlying problem really is in the pre
mature fallback in the fast path. Does the almost-patch below helps your
workload? It effectively reduces the fast path for higher order
allocations to the local/requested node. The justification is that
watermark check might be too strict for those requests as it is primary
order-0 oriented. Low watermark target simply has no meaning for the
higher order requests AFAIU. The min-low gap is giving kswapd a chance
to balance and be more local node friendly while we do not have anything
like that in compaction.

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index ff5484fdbdf9..09036cf55fca 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4685,7 +4685,7 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid,
 {
 	struct page *page;
 	unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_LOW;
-	gfp_t alloc_mask; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
+	gfp_t fastpath_mask, alloc_mask; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
 	struct alloc_context ac = { };
 
 	/*
@@ -4698,7 +4698,7 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid,
 	}
 
 	gfp_mask &= gfp_allowed_mask;
-	alloc_mask = gfp_mask;
+	fastpath_mask = alloc_mask = gfp_mask;
 	if (!prepare_alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, preferred_nid, nodemask, &ac, &alloc_mask, &alloc_flags))
 		return NULL;
 
@@ -4710,8 +4710,17 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid,
 	 */
 	alloc_flags |= alloc_flags_nofragment(ac.preferred_zoneref->zone, gfp_mask);
 
-	/* First allocation attempt */
-	page = get_page_from_freelist(alloc_mask, order, alloc_flags, &ac);
+	/*
+	 * First allocation attempt. If we have a high order allocation then do not fall
+	 * back to a remote node just based on the watermark check on the requested node
+	 * because compaction might easily free up a requested order and then it would be
+	 * better to simply go to the slow path.
+	 * TODO: kcompactd should help here but nobody has woken it up unless we hit the
+	 * slow path so we might need some tuning there as well.
+	 */
+	if (order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM))
+		fastpath_mask |= __GFP_THISNODE;
+	page = get_page_from_freelist(fastpath_mask, order, alloc_flags, &ac);
 	if (likely(page))
 		goto out;
 
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-25  7:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-04 19:54 David Rientjes
2019-09-04 19:54 ` [rfc 3/4] mm, page_alloc: avoid expensive reclaim when compaction may not succeed David Rientjes
2019-09-05  9:00   ` Michal Hocko
2019-09-05 11:22     ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-09-05 20:53       ` Mike Kravetz
2019-09-06 20:16         ` David Rientjes
2019-09-06 20:49       ` David Rientjes
2019-09-04 20:43 ` [patch for-5.3 0/4] revert immediate fallback to remote hugepages Linus Torvalds
2019-09-05 20:54   ` David Rientjes
2019-09-07 19:51     ` David Rientjes
2019-09-07 19:55       ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-08  1:50         ` David Rientjes
2019-09-08 12:47           ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-09-08 20:45             ` David Rientjes
2019-09-09  8:37               ` Michal Hocko
2019-09-04 20:55 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2019-09-05 21:06   ` David Rientjes
2019-09-09 19:30     ` Michal Hocko
2019-09-25  7:08       ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-09-26 19:03         ` David Rientjes
2019-09-27  7:48           ` Michal Hocko
2019-09-28 20:59             ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-30 11:28               ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-01  5:43                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-01  8:37                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-18 14:15                     ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-23 11:03                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-24 18:59                         ` David Rientjes
2019-10-29 14:14                           ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-29 15:15                             ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-29 21:33                               ` Andrew Morton
2019-10-29 21:45                                 ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-29 23:25                                 ` David Rientjes
2019-11-05 13:02                                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-06  1:01                                     ` David Rientjes
2019-11-06  7:35                                       ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-06 21:32                                         ` David Rientjes
2019-11-13 11:20                                           ` Mel Gorman
2019-11-25  0:10                                             ` David Rientjes
2019-11-25 11:47                                               ` Michal Hocko
2019-11-25 20:38                                                 ` David Rientjes
2019-11-25 21:34                                                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-01 13:50                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-01 20:31                     ` David Rientjes
2019-10-01 21:54                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-02 10:34                         ` Michal Hocko
2019-10-02 22:32                           ` David Rientjes
2019-10-03  8:00                             ` Vlastimil Babka
2019-10-04 12:18                               ` 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=20190925070817.GH23050@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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