From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [patch for-5.3 0/4] revert immediate fallback to remote hugepages
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:47:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191125114708.GI31714@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1911241548340.192260@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Sun 24-11-19 16:10:53, David Rientjes wrote:
[...]
> So my question would be: if we know the previous behavior that allowed
> excessive swap and recalling into compaction was deemed harmful for the
> local node, why do we now believe it cannot be harmful if done for all
> system memory?
I have to say that I got lost in your explanation. I have already
pointed this out in a previous email you didn't reply to. But the main
difference to previous __GFP_THISNODE behavior is that it is used along
with __GFP_NORETRY and that reduces the overall effort of the reclaim
AFAIU. If that is not the case then please be _explicit_ why.
Having test results from Andrea would be really appreciated of course
but he seems to be too busy to do that (or maybe not interested
anymore). I do not see any real reason to hold on this patch based on
hand waving though. So either we have some good reasoning to argue
against the patch or a good testing results or we should go ahead.
As things stand right now, THP success rate went down after your last
changes for _very simple_ workloads. This needs addressing which I hope
we do agree on.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-25 11:47 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
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 [this message]
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=20191125114708.GI31714@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