From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f197.google.com (mail-io0-f197.google.com [209.85.223.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E914D6B0038 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 11:40:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f197.google.com with SMTP id r94so295596467ioe.7 for ; Wed, 07 Dec 2016 08:40:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:39]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14si17909593iop.78.2016.12.07.08.40.50 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 07 Dec 2016 08:40:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 10:40:47 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 In-Reply-To: <20161207155750.yfsizliaoodks5k4@techsingularity.net> Message-ID: References: <20161207101228.8128-1-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <20161207155750.yfsizliaoodks5k4@techsingularity.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Johannes Weiner , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Joonsoo Kim , Linux-MM , Linux-Kernel On Wed, 7 Dec 2016, Mel Gorman wrote: > Which is related to the fundamentals of fragmentation control in > general. At some point there will have to be a revisit to get back to > the type of reliability that existed in 3.0-era without the massive > overhead it incurred. As stated before, I agree it's important but > outside the scope of this patch. What reliability issues are there? 3.X kernels were better in what way? Which overhead are we talking about? Fragmentation has been a problem for a long time and the issue gets worse as memory sizes increase, the hardware improves and the expectations on throughput and reliability increase. -- 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: email@kvack.org