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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F14C25B75 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 05:43:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4B85E6B009B; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 01:43:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 469306B009C; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 01:43:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 308F86B009D; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 01:43:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE296B009B for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 01:43:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A80C107D for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 05:43:42 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82199371884.30.F8FCA78 Received: from mail-pg1-f174.google.com (mail-pg1-f174.google.com [209.85.215.174]) by imf13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CD4720003 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2024 05:43:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf13.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=chromium.org header.s=google header.b=YzaRmcqQ; spf=pass (imf13.hostedemail.com: domain of senozhatsky@chromium.org designates 209.85.215.174 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=senozhatsky@chromium.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=chromium.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1717652620; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=9evaiRpo0K0MKjvHd6Fu6tPQEBbm84cbZFPUlgH+U/c=; b=uM202CmXvofIX1f48mUMx6So21dRUF9oSg90dItKeuJnWXw6hiIfqTb5Ak3NBoLqOonkWj GVpG4GNLHQ/Irxr2o882WEAMBrkX7WdAoa9k3mXk0RJ5ywbik5+xH5UWfQc/pfVO5aXcnl TjUtL8yaJjpJgJVGh7NFui0myAAD1dI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf13.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=chromium.org header.s=google header.b=YzaRmcqQ; spf=pass (imf13.hostedemail.com: domain of senozhatsky@chromium.org designates 209.85.215.174 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=senozhatsky@chromium.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=chromium.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1717652620; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=QZpZiQX36dJdesKSTiVqDieOK0b7SmmBl4IrIQuGncku+jN0W3i+fq3C1qf2DX8AjmmNPi O1cDxiotNOmIGu4UFnrgtjRKwPuEI+H4QCvLwkgTy/NgcHkZjctjfFaNNWFACNORMW49/E 3TNZvBXzQ32ol1e67BbOJk0TA87hOEQ= Received: by mail-pg1-f174.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-6819b3c92bbso420635a12.2 for ; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 22:43:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; t=1717652619; x=1718257419; darn=kvack.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9evaiRpo0K0MKjvHd6Fu6tPQEBbm84cbZFPUlgH+U/c=; b=YzaRmcqQz0atvtaOx/uoKP0MEGtVC4VulUjvq2OC+odMMOoAdl2vQtkP0cUohnQ8fQ raV9hlLgVUJ7O3X9x91MRh7MaXuYppJFzSafljzau32K2vxLaL5NzvqKuBVegfZDPYHF Pzpprv1P8biRcKAvIADsrHIzZGyUgSEqXad3o= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717652619; x=1718257419; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=9evaiRpo0K0MKjvHd6Fu6tPQEBbm84cbZFPUlgH+U/c=; b=SY6I6xcP/GafRbXS26u4Ap3y6DGbedLEJmW66VhZf52V1dNzRBhC3QSMnUiCok8lwq mn3Nw2avJWT7a2XnodRA2NHe3HKdCPQDJxEO7vBvpnVxWanOvToe2m5FtmLu6wGeQYTX 8OjnXjmCs10v7L53nAaIQGmkvjB01fFJC7MORwsEuUq18ru+QQwNGyjcnzeE2nTdAwyx vfiGX25aTCe3bUutQPY+GB1jV+2E7m3DNbgUY0hNxHVe9lOp6YgmEb6YKSdOUFAPi515 NypWGopnOKps6G+TgP2Ngu9CLM3n+HTZg/Ye/AZ6xe6yqf5GCLgEIQr+wpnVyacgS5rY d0CA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVBgHlTl4+m1UAQCd2fuRHMP75ae9dMKD3ZJ+o9VIfXYcjIEee2sustXhYwTTPhU2dK/n2F4Qo+bjzPv7bWPLcJbqc= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxiEf7vlSLAsLA/sUfNdD1X6vMVeUcTqzVjZ10zxgleQU6i2N8r rHkK/lOYVq3mmvPeIy0hlTNEcjyJfdT9P0/5mJpjVCTI/oJxJ4hl95erfNnQUg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFy7hjyNVNxBD93ScL0gjQe1sK4zEeKhq1Mmbs2AmOIwNZ2Z1Ekq4heMJmewPkxaRSXKcuUxw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:430f:b0:1af:dae8:5ea2 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1b2b710b40fmr5480556637.48.1717652619298; Wed, 05 Jun 2024 22:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2401:fa00:8f:203:22f8:8e4a:7027:de56]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-1f6bd7f28adsm5220295ad.265.2024.06.05.22.43.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 Jun 2024 22:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 14:43:34 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Chengming Zhou Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Yosry Ahmed , Erhard Furtner , Yu Zhao , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Johannes Weiner , Nhat Pham , Minchan Kim , "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" Subject: Re: kswapd0: page allocation failure: order:0, mode:0x820(GFP_ATOMIC), nodemask=(null),cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0 (Kernel v6.5.9, 32bit ppc) Message-ID: <20240606054334.GD11718@google.com> References: <20240604231019.18e2f373@yea> <20240606010431.2b33318c@yea> <20240606043156.GC11718@google.com> <6335c05d-9493-4b03-85a7-f2dd91db9451@linux.dev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6335c05d-9493-4b03-85a7-f2dd91db9451@linux.dev> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9CD4720003 X-Stat-Signature: rah68o5rww9tnb65qzyswzns8keyr9tt X-HE-Tag: 1717652620-60514 X-HE-Meta: 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 1jh+I6sG Q4+JtM+nnoEyqCBETrqpUuBCmiCEK6w9WKYtvGGMSAPj+tuspE+suQCKg/7fwY4ujRF96xIW0pnIDmmIbc40Cersd9ffHkaUYT0HXVRy3Syn52Us36JfUpcj9QjxaccuwPBudoVD+C3uTvfrCCyCJGY6Hlnlprmn/YIaIOvvioDTuK+XgvUMLUQwf95wPoJkSVD9mwFNccfGsZzf/BX7YILJzpNqTX6V/ncPun0kWSN9gCBBXucWVRqeusYqHS4ysORXOgDM8DKsIxJ/SNvFkr7NHGo7Iu5OpGqFjAABnTegBxcFwPl5WQhwVb1p1DmRGXwNqnjSDJL8DKuB2YS9vBffrJs3NHL5pUomvvhFjhvs6rcr6m26dWlIQ9F55TgLYDPmrakamguOkyU82QAD8CGPbWDtJuQZ9TAbmj+eqalSMREMP8r/4higRrZBreWBhSTmN X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On (24/06/06 12:46), Chengming Zhou wrote: > >> Agree, I think we should try to improve locking scalability of zsmalloc. > >> I have some thoughts to share, no code or test data yet: > >> > >> 1. First, we can change the pool global lock to per-class lock, which > >> is more fine-grained. > > > > Commit c0547d0b6a4b6 "zsmalloc: consolidate zs_pool's migrate_lock > > and size_class's locks" [1] claimed no significant difference > > between class->lock and pool->lock. > > Ok, I haven't looked into the history much, that seems preparation of trying > to introduce reclaim in the zsmalloc? Not sure. But now with the reclaim code > in zsmalloc has gone, should we change back to the per-class lock? Which is Well, the point that commit made was that Nhat (and Johannes?) were unable to detect any impact of pool->lock on a variety of cases. So we went on with code simplification. > obviously more fine-grained than the pool lock. Actually, I have just done it, > will test to get some data later. Thanks, we'll need data on this. I'm happy to take the patch, but jumping back and forth between class->lock and pool->lock merely "for obvious reasons" is not what I'm extremely excited about.