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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0CFC5DF64 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:32:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5E3217F5 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="p6UlB+Fa" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ED5E3217F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A556B6B0003; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:32:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A2D276B0006; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:32:41 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9444E6B0007; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:32:41 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0163.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.163]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB2C6B0003 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:32:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 02161180AD80F for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:32:41 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76127152080.17.van17_8bc6f2f155b13 X-HE-Tag: van17_8bc6f2f155b13 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5041 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com (mail-pl1-f194.google.com [209.85.214.194]) by imf28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:32:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id a18so10920769plm.10 for ; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 13:32:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=nlf0rW8YMaJI3hbbUU1xaIyWPo21KwOubstHCGTGWEw=; b=p6UlB+FaZrAgnMFREh/yTO6OkfgcyKeaZ6bo8a3QAZdwHPKnTavuZWsepUGByDzDyk FmxmzNwGsIM03cFt5IdOM///C+udVWm+er46+h0U9r7fn/wIa1BPFgTRgYskbbT3egl9 fDSS0JeSSx2Jp4oLIxsDS3d7SDO6rLBfhJ6Prey4lGcz9EoS4M99QofjDMrRrQUNs1TT UhYGwynu889ijzztQscu1jc5QN93q/edSirXWRTB/7XifcHOT4Q2yTSZ7RjKdoY3Sk2L ATFkHSZYoQtp/j0da+HNKsN5gD3/5xSTwKeYncZbENFI/XCNdDXjUltpFWPvo992/EFH ggig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=nlf0rW8YMaJI3hbbUU1xaIyWPo21KwOubstHCGTGWEw=; b=QOBc0QRRYgx+vCYTMyEUX6EjbZZ4a3l7bWbzqoDOaM/1TnSjFbcnjYpbXyS9BMowBh 6bANoAr99bsU3igMk9aK9N1TZdH5PrdVirdilkoM720c3TET+6/uEd3sBPPK2TilRHIm VEFq51jhKkOvb6mU7r8roiZEA8Omr8oICg65Jxj2IGYX1Tcybr46CkAayL8Bp+qgAPx2 BaIvxbLtZF48Y77I6Qp7fW0pliRRgFbE0J8jbQANAj5jyUSBrE19aHv0gDifLBbcKtAE Xcs8o4cCUhyBmofB2A8eoUzFkGIgS7zoYKdC9KG8AQi1ki980f98pak3bc9EyLhwKeom 5Kbg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV54ld2iw6tf3KqusjWVCGAfOZPz5bRSVjNGxwL5kJlIiQ7K77K yW1xnd2laA95txPcsuLTURCI2Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwyi8rwFGE4QcTT3ILp9LCRu0U/bFplVLnOtuXl5xCvRUgVBWUk37wyEFxIQKLftcQ4BZC2LA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9f83:: with SMTP id g3mr4832657plq.161.1573075959127; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 13:32:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [2620:15c:17:3:3a5:23a7:5e32:4598] ([2620:15c:17:3:3a5:23a7:5e32:4598]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 70sm26310202pfw.160.2019.11.06.13.32.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 13:32:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 13:32:37 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Michal Hocko cc: Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , Mel Gorman , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-MM Subject: Re: [patch for-5.3 0/4] revert immediate fallback to remote hugepages In-Reply-To: <20191106073521.GC8314@dhcp22.suse.cz> Message-ID: References: <20191001083743.GC15624@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191018141550.GS5017@dhcp22.suse.cz> <53c4a6ca-a4d0-0862-8744-f999b17d82d8@suse.cz> <08a3f4dd-c3ce-0009-86c5-9ee51aba8557@suse.cz> <20191029151549.GO31513@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191029143351.95f781f09a9fbf254163d728@linux-foundation.org> <20191105130253.GO22672@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191106073521.GC8314@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII 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: On Wed, 6 Nov 2019, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I don't see any > > indication that this allocation would behave any different than the code > > that Andrea experienced swap storms with, but now worse if remote memory > > is in the same state local memory is when he's using __GFP_THISNODE. > > The primary reason for the extensive swapping was exactly the __GFP_THISNODE > in conjunction with an unbounded direct reclaim AFAIR. > > The whole point of the Vlastimil's patch is to have an optimistic local > node allocation first and the full gfp context one in the fallback path. > If our full gfp context doesn't really work well then we can revisit > that of course but that should happen at alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask > level. Since the patch reverts the precaution put into the page allocator to not attempt reclaim if the allocation order is significantly large and the return value from compaction specifies it is unlikely to succed on its own, I believe Vlastimil's patch will cause the same regression that Andrea saw is the whole host is low on memory and/or significantly fragmented. So the suggestion was that he test this change to make sure we aren't introducing a regression for his workload.