From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.23-rc1-mm1 - fix missing numa_zonelist_order sysctl
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:07:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1186067258.5040.33.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070802094445.6495e25d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 09:44 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:02:51 -0400
> Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com> wrote:
> > [But, maybe reordering the zonelists is not such a good idea
> > when ZONE_MOVABLE is populated?]
> >
>
> It's case-by-case I think. In zone order with ZONE_MOVABLE case,
> user's page cache will not use ZONE_NORMAL until ZONE_MOVABLE in all node
> is exhausted. This is an expected behavior, I think.
>
> I think the real problem is the scheme for "How to set zone movable size to
> appropriate value for the system". This needs more study and documentation.
> (but maybe depends on system configuration to some extent.)
Yes. Having thought about it a bit more, maybe zone order IS what we
want if we desire the remainder of the zone from which is was taken
[ZONE_MOVABLE-1] to be reserved for non-movable kernel use as long as
possible--similar to the dma zone. I had made the non-movable zone very
large for testing, so that I could create a segment that used all of the
movable zones on all the nodes and then dip into the non-movable/normal
zone. If I used a more reasonable [much smaller] amount of kernelcore,
the interleave would have worked as "expected".
Of course, I don't have any idea of what is a "reasonable amount".
Guess I could look at non-movable zone memory usage in a system at
typical or peak load to get an idea. Anyone have any data in this
regard?
Lee
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.23-rc1-mm1 - fix missing numa_zonelist_order sysctl
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 11:07:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1186067258.5040.33.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070802094445.6495e25d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 09:44 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:02:51 -0400
> Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com> wrote:
> > [But, maybe reordering the zonelists is not such a good idea
> > when ZONE_MOVABLE is populated?]
> >
>
> It's case-by-case I think. In zone order with ZONE_MOVABLE case,
> user's page cache will not use ZONE_NORMAL until ZONE_MOVABLE in all node
> is exhausted. This is an expected behavior, I think.
>
> I think the real problem is the scheme for "How to set zone movable size to
> appropriate value for the system". This needs more study and documentation.
> (but maybe depends on system configuration to some extent.)
Yes. Having thought about it a bit more, maybe zone order IS what we
want if we desire the remainder of the zone from which is was taken
[ZONE_MOVABLE-1] to be reserved for non-movable kernel use as long as
possible--similar to the dma zone. I had made the non-movable zone very
large for testing, so that I could create a segment that used all of the
movable zones on all the nodes and then dip into the non-movable/normal
zone. If I used a more reasonable [much smaller] amount of kernelcore,
the interleave would have worked as "expected".
Of course, I don't have any idea of what is a "reasonable amount".
Guess I could look at non-movable zone memory usage in a system at
typical or peak load to get an idea. Anyone have any data in this
regard?
Lee
--
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:[~2007-08-02 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-01 19:02 [PATCH] 2.6.23-rc1-mm1 - fix missing numa_zonelist_order sysctl Lee Schermerhorn
2007-08-01 19:02 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-08-02 0:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-08-02 0:44 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-08-02 15:07 ` Lee Schermerhorn [this message]
2007-08-02 15:07 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-08-03 0:27 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-08-03 0:27 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-08-02 16:14 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-02 16:14 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-02 16:18 ` Mel Gorman
2007-08-02 16:18 ` Mel Gorman
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=1186067258.5040.33.camel@localhost \
--to=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.