From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 17/17] mm, vmscan: make compaction_ready() more accurate and readable
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 13:48:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <934f0092-c9e9-5e38-cb2b-b09de5bd91ef@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160706055550.GG23627@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
On 07/06/2016 07:55 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:54:37AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> The compaction_ready() is used during direct reclaim for costly order
>> allocations to skip reclaim for zones where compaction should be attempted
>> instead. It's combining the standard compaction_suitable() check with its own
>> watermark check based on high watermark with extra gap, and the result is
>> confusing at best.
>>
>> This patch attempts to better structure and document the checks involved.
>> First, compaction_suitable() can determine that the allocation should either
>> succeed already, or that compaction doesn't have enough free pages to proceed.
>> The third possibility is that compaction has enough free pages, but we still
>> decide to reclaim first - unless we are already above the high watermark with
>> gap. This does not mean that the reclaim will actually reach this watermark
>> during single attempt, this is rather an over-reclaim protection. So document
>> the code as such. The check for compaction_deferred() is removed completely, as
>> it in fact had no proper role here.
>>
>> The result after this patch is mainly a less confusing code. We also skip some
>> over-reclaim in cases where the allocation should already succed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
>> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>> ---
>> mm/vmscan.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>> index 484ff05d5a8f..724131661f0c 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -2462,40 +2462,37 @@ static bool shrink_zone(struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc,
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> - * Returns true if compaction should go ahead for a high-order request, or
>> - * the high-order allocation would succeed without compaction.
>> + * Returns true if compaction should go ahead for a costly-order request, or
>> + * the allocation would already succeed without compaction. Return false if we
>> + * should reclaim first.
>> */
>> static inline bool compaction_ready(struct zone *zone, int order, int classzone_idx)
>> {
>> unsigned long balance_gap, watermark;
>> - bool watermark_ok;
>> + enum compact_result suitable;
>> +
>> + suitable = compaction_suitable(zone, order, 0, classzone_idx);
>> + if (suitable == COMPACT_PARTIAL)
>> + /* Allocation should succeed already. Don't reclaim. */
>> + return true;
>> + if (suitable == COMPACT_SKIPPED)
>> + /* Compaction cannot yet proceed. Do reclaim. */
>> + return false;
>>
>> /*
>> - * Compaction takes time to run and there are potentially other
>> - * callers using the pages just freed. Continue reclaiming until
>> - * there is a buffer of free pages available to give compaction
>> - * a reasonable chance of completing and allocating the page
>> + * Compaction is already possible, but it takes time to run and there
>> + * are potentially other callers using the pages just freed. So proceed
>> + * with reclaim to make a buffer of free pages available to give
>> + * compaction a reasonable chance of completing and allocating the page.
>> + * Note that we won't actually reclaim the whole buffer in one attempt
>> + * as the target watermark in should_continue_reclaim() is lower. But if
>> + * we are already above the high+gap watermark, don't reclaim at all.
>> */
>> balance_gap = min(low_wmark_pages(zone), DIV_ROUND_UP(
>> zone->managed_pages, KSWAPD_ZONE_BALANCE_GAP_RATIO));
>> watermark = high_wmark_pages(zone) + balance_gap + compact_gap(order);
>> - watermark_ok = zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, 0, watermark, classzone_idx);
>
> Hmm... it doesn't explain why both high_wmark_pages and balance_gap
> are needed. If we want to make a buffer, one of them would work.
Mel's series removed KSWAPD_ZONE_BALANCE_GAP_RATIO meanwhile, so that
should be fine.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-18 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-24 9:54 [PATCH v3 00/17] make direct compaction more deterministic Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 01/17] mm, compaction: don't isolate PageWriteback pages in MIGRATE_SYNC_LIGHT mode Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 02/17] mm, page_alloc: set alloc_flags only once in slowpath Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-30 14:44 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 03/17] mm, page_alloc: don't retry initial attempt " Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-30 15:03 ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 04/17] mm, page_alloc: restructure direct compaction handling " Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 05/17] mm, page_alloc: make THP-specific decisions more generic Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 06/17] mm, thp: remove __GFP_NORETRY from khugepaged and madvised allocations Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 07/17] mm, compaction: introduce direct compaction priority Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 11:39 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-24 11:51 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 08/17] mm, compaction: simplify contended compaction handling Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 09/17] mm, compaction: make whole_zone flag ignore cached scanner positions Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-06 5:09 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-18 9:12 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-19 6:44 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-19 6:54 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 10/17] mm, compaction: cleanup unused functions Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 11:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 11/17] mm, compaction: add the ultimate direct compaction priority Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 12/17] mm, compaction: more reliably increase " Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-06 5:39 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-15 13:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-18 4:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-18 12:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-19 4:53 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-19 7:42 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 13/17] mm, compaction: use correct watermark when checking allocation success Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-06 5:47 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-18 9:23 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 14/17] mm, compaction: create compact_gap wrapper Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 15/17] mm, compaction: use proper alloc_flags in __compaction_suitable() Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 16/17] mm, compaction: require only min watermarks for non-costly orders Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-24 9:54 ` [PATCH v3 17/17] mm, vmscan: make compaction_ready() more accurate and readable Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-06 5:55 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-07-18 11:48 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
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=934f0092-c9e9-5e38-cb2b-b09de5bd91ef@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@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