From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0672BC3B187 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C21621734 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7C21621734 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=techsingularity.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 0FA106B04DD; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 18:55:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 0AAF56B04DF; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 18:55:31 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 00F296B04E0; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 18:55:30 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0101.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.101]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0FB96B04DD for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 18:55:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A47F340E1 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:30 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76483134420.18.print18_6a3aca01a0216 X-HE-Tag: print18_6a3aca01a0216 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2582 Received: from outbound-smtp53.blacknight.com (outbound-smtp53.blacknight.com [46.22.136.237]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.blacknight.com (pemlinmail02.blacknight.ie [81.17.254.11]) by outbound-smtp53.blacknight.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17D85FA85A for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 2395 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2020 23:55:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO techsingularity.net) (mgorman@techsingularity.net@[84.203.18.57]) by 81.17.254.9 with ESMTPSA (AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 12 Feb 2020 23:55:27 -0000 Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 23:55:25 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Ivan Babrou Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel , kernel-team , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: Reclaim regression after 1c30844d2dfe Message-ID: <20200212235525.GU3466@techsingularity.net> References: <20200211101627.GJ3466@techsingularity.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000304, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 02:45:39PM -0800, Ivan Babrou wrote: > Here's a typical graph: https://imgur.com/a/n03x5yH > > * Green (numa0) and blue (numa1) for 4.19 > * Yellow (numa0) and orange (numa1) for 5.4 > > These downward slopes on numa0 on 5.4 are somewhat typical to the > worst case scenario. > > If I try to clean up data a bit from a bunch of machines, this is how > numa0 compares to numa1 with 1h average values of free memory above > 5GiB: > > * https://imgur.com/a/6T4rRzi > > I think it's safe to say that numa0 is much much worse, but I cannot > be 100% sure that numa1 is free from adverse effects, they may be just > hiding in the noise caused by rolling reboots. > Ok, while I expected node 0 to be worse in general, a runaway boost due to constant fragmentation would be a problem in general. In either case, the patch should reduce the damage. Is there any chance that the patch can be tested or would it be disruptive for you? -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs