linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	weixugc@google.com, shakeelb@google.com, gthelen@google.com,
	fvdl@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm: disable top-tier fallback to reclaim on proactive reclaim
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 13:38:40 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221202133840.5cdd4270cf73eaaa1d9d0345@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221201233317.1394958-1-almasrymina@google.com>

On Thu,  1 Dec 2022 15:33:17 -0800 Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com> wrote:

> Reclaiming directly from top tier nodes breaks the aging pipeline of
> memory tiers.  If we have a RAM -> CXL -> storage hierarchy, we
> should demote from RAM to CXL and from CXL to storage. If we reclaim
> a page from RAM, it means we 'demote' it directly from RAM to storage,
> bypassing potentially a huge amount of pages colder than it in CXL.
> 
> However disabling reclaim from top tier nodes entirely would cause ooms
> in edge scenarios where lower tier memory is unreclaimable for whatever
> reason, e.g. memory being mlocked() or too hot to reclaim.  In these
> cases we would rather the job run with a performance regression rather
> than it oom altogether.
> 
> However, we can disable reclaim from top tier nodes for proactive reclaim.
> That reclaim is not real memory pressure, and we don't have any cause to
> be breaking the aging pipeline.
> 

Is this purely from code inspection, or are there quantitative
observations to be shared?



  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-12-02 21:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-01 23:33 Mina Almasry
2022-12-02  2:44 ` Huang, Ying
2022-12-02 21:38 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2022-12-02 21:52   ` Mina Almasry
2022-12-05 23:37 ` 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=20221202133840.5cdd4270cf73eaaa1d9d0345@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=almasrymina@google.com \
    --cc=fvdl@google.com \
    --cc=gthelen@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=weixugc@google.com \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=yosryahmed@google.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