From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Postphone reclaim laundry to write at high water marks
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:29:44 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708211418120.3267@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1187730812.5463.12.camel@lappy>
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> It quickly ends up with all of memory in the laundry list and then
> recursing into __alloc_pages which will fail to make progress and OOMs.
Hmmmm... Okay that needs to be addressed. Reserves need to be used and we
only should enter reclaim if that runs out (like the first patch that I
did).
> But aside from the numerous issues with the patch set as presented, I'm
> not seeing the seeing the big picture, why are you doing this.
I want general improvements to reclaim to address the issues that you see
and other issues related to reclaim instead of the strange code that makes
PF_MEMALLOC allocs compete for allocations from a single slab and putting
logic into the kernel to decide which allocs to fail. We can reclaim after
all. Its just a matter of finding the right way to do this.
> Anonymous pages are a there to stay, and we cannot tell people how to
> use them. So we need some free or freeable pages in order to avoid the
> vm deadlock that arises from all memory dirty.
No one is trying to abolish Anonymous pages. Free memory is readily
available on demand if one calls reclaim. Your scheme introduces complex
negotiations over a few scraps of memory when large amounts of memory
would still be readily available if one would do the right thing and call
into reclaim.
> 'Optimizing' this by switching to freeable pages has mainly
> disadvantages IMHO, finding them scrambles LRU order and complexifies
> relcaim and all that for a relatively small gain in space for clean
> pagecache pages.
Sounds like you would like to change the way we handle memory in general
in the VM? Reclaim (and thus finding freeable pages) is basic to Linux
memory management.
> Please, stop writing patches and write down a solid proposal of how you
> envision the VM working in the various scenarios and why its better than
> the current approach.
Sorry I just got into this a short time ago and I may need a few cycles
to get this all straight. An approach that uses memory instead of
ignoring available memory is certainly better.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-21 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-20 21:50 Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 1/7] release_lru_pages(): Generic release of pages to the LRU Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 14:52 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-21 20:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 2/7] Move checks from pageout() to shrink_page_list Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 3/7] shrink_page_list: Support isolating dirty pages on laundry list Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 15:04 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-21 20:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 4/7] Pass laundry through shrink_inactive_list() and shrink_zone() Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 5/7] Laundry handling for direct reclaim Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 15:06 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-21 20:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 15:19 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-21 21:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 6/7] kswapd: Do laundry after reclaim Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:50 ` [RFC 7/7] Switch of PF_MEMALLOC during writeout Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 23:08 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-20 23:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 1:13 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-21 10:36 ` [RFC 0/7] Postphone reclaim laundry to write at high water marks Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-21 20:48 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 21:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-21 21:29 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2007-08-21 21:43 ` Rik van Riel
2007-08-21 22:32 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-23 12:05 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-08-23 20:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 22:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-21 22:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-22 7:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-22 19:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-22 20:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-22 20:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-23 7:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-26 4:52 ` Rik van Riel
2007-08-23 12:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-08-22 7:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-22 19:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-23 12:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-08-23 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-21 15:16 ` Rik van Riel
2007-08-21 20:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 21:14 ` Rik van Riel
2007-08-21 21:30 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 15:51 ` Dave McCracken
2007-08-21 21:03 ` Christoph Lameter
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0708211418120.3267@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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