From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, ktkhai@virtuozzo.com,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, hughd@google.com, shakeelb@google.com,
rientjes@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm thp: shrink deferred split THPs harder
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:40:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191002084014.GH15624@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1569974210-55366-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
On Wed 02-10-19 07:56:50, Yang Shi wrote:
> The deferred split THPs may get accumulated with some workloads, they
> would get shrunk when memory pressure is hit. Now we use DEFAULT_SEEKS
> to determine how many objects would get scanned then split if possible,
> but actually they are not like other system cache objects, i.e. inode
> cache which would incur extra I/O if over reclaimed, the unmapped pages
> will not be accessed anymore, so we could shrink them more aggressively.
>
> We could shrink THPs more pro-actively even though memory pressure is not
> hit, however, IMHO waiting for memory pressure is still a good
> compromise and trade-off. And, we do have simpler ways to shrink these
> objects harder until we have to take other means do pro-actively drain.
>
> Change shrinker->seeks to 0 to shrink deferred split THPs harder.
Do you have any numbers on the effect of this patch.
Btw. the whole thing is getting more and more complex and I still
believe the approach is just wrong. We are tunning for something that
doesn't really belong to the memory reclaim in the first place IMHO.
> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> mm/huge_memory.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 3b78910..1d6b1f1 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -2955,7 +2955,7 @@ static unsigned long deferred_split_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
> static struct shrinker deferred_split_shrinker = {
> .count_objects = deferred_split_count,
> .scan_objects = deferred_split_scan,
> - .seeks = DEFAULT_SEEKS,
> + .seeks = 0,
> .flags = SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE | SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE |
> SHRINKER_NONSLAB,
> };
> --
> 1.8.3.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-02 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-01 23:56 Yang Shi
2019-10-02 8:40 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-10-02 17:26 ` Yang Shi
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=20191002084014.GH15624@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.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