From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>,
Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] mm, page_alloc: fail costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations faster
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 09:46:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9881b540-7e22-404b-aeaa-282dc5eeb5d5@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251216203243.GJ905277@cmpxchg.org>
On 12/16/25 21:32, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 04:54:22PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> It might make therefore more sense to just fail unconditionally after
>> the initial compaction attempt, so do that instead. Costly allocations
>> that do want the reclaim/compaction to happen at least once can omit
>> __GFP_NORETRY, or even specify __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL for more than one
>> attempt.
>>
>> There is a slight potential unfairness in that costly __GFP_NORETRY
>> allocations that can't perform direct compaction (i.e. lack __GFP_IO)
>> will still be allowed to direct reclaim, while those that can direct
>> compact will now never attempt direct reclaim. However, in cases of
>> memory pressure causing compaction to be skipped due to insufficient
>> base pages, direct reclaim was already not done before, so there should
>> be no functional regressions from this change.
>
> Hm, kind of. There could be enough basepages for compaction_suitable()
> but compaction odds are still higher with more free pages. So there
> might be cases it regresses.
>
> __GFP_NORETRY semantics say it'll try reclaim at least once. We should
> be able to keep that and still simplify, no?
>
>> if (costly_order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY)) {
>> - if (gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)
>> - goto nopage;
>> + goto nopage;
>
> IOW, maybe directly select for the NUMA-THP special case here?
>
> /* Optimistic node-local huge page - only compact once */
> if (costly_order &&
> ((gfp_mask & (__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_THISNODE)) ==
> (__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_THISNODE)))
> goto nopage;
>
> and then let other __GFP_NORETRY fall through.
I did consider it as an alternative when realizing the potential unfairness
mentioned above, but then went with the simpler code option.
With your suggestion we keep the THP-specific check but at least remove the
arguably illogical compaction feedback.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-17 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-16 15:54 [PATCH RFC 0/2] tweaks for costly order __GFP_NORETRY reclaim Vlastimil Babka
2025-12-16 15:54 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] mm, page_alloc, thp: prevent reclaim for __GFP_THISNODE THP allocations Vlastimil Babka
2025-12-16 16:26 ` Michal Hocko
2025-12-16 20:11 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-12-16 20:23 ` Zi Yan
2025-12-17 15:53 ` Pedro Falcato
2025-12-16 15:54 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] mm, page_alloc: fail costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations faster Vlastimil Babka
2025-12-16 16:28 ` Michal Hocko
2025-12-16 20:32 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-12-17 8:46 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-12-17 16:35 ` Johannes Weiner
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=9881b540-7e22-404b-aeaa-282dc5eeb5d5@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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