All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:28:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1245785335.24110.19.camel@alok-dev1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150630.31c0dff5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>


On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 23:06 -0700, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:54:01 -0700
> Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't have any strong oppose reason, but I also don't have any strong
> > > > agree reason.
> > > > 
> > > I think "don't include Hugepage" is sane. Hugepage is something _special_, now.
> > > 
> > Kamezawa-san, 
> > 
> > I agree that hugepages are special in the sense that they are
> > implemented specially and don't actually reside on the LRU like any
> > other locked memory. But, both of these memory types (mlocked and
> > hugepages) are actually unevictable and can't be reclaimed back, so i
> > don't see a reason why should accounting not reflect that.
> > 
> 
> I bet we should rename "Unevictable" to "Mlocked" or "Pinned" rather than
> take nr_hugepages into account. I think this "Unevictable" in meminfo means
> - pages which are evictable in their nature (because in LRU) but a user pinned it -
> 
> How about rename "Unevictable" to "Pinned" or "Locked" ?
> (Mlocked + locked shmem's + ramfs?)
> 

As Lee also pointed out, i don't see why is this # of pages on
unevictable_lru important for the user.
IMO, it doesn't give any useful information, other than confusing us to
believe that only these are unevictable.

Is there something else that I am missing here ?

> We have other "unevictable" pages other than Hugepage anyway.
>  - page table
>  - some slab
>  - kernel's page
>  - anon pages in swapless system
>  etc...

I agree there are these other pages which are unevictable, but they are
pages used by the kernel itself, and they will always be locked/utilized
by the kernel. 
The unevictable pages (hugepages and mlocked and others) on the other
hand are pages which the user explicitly asked to be locked/pinned.

So i think, these other-evictable pages that you mentioned, are
different in a way. 

> 
> BTW, I use following calculation for quick check if I want all "Unevicatable" pages.
> 
> Unevictable = Total - (Active+Inactive) + (50-70%? of slab)
> 
> This # of is not-reclaimable memory.

I don't see how this would get the correct value either, mlocked or
hugepages are not accounted by either of the Active or Inactive regions.


Thanks,
Alok

> 
> Thanks,
> -Kame
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Alok
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Kame
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:28:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1245785335.24110.19.camel@alok-dev1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150630.31c0dff5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>


On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 23:06 -0700, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:54:01 -0700
> Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't have any strong oppose reason, but I also don't have any strong
> > > > agree reason.
> > > > 
> > > I think "don't include Hugepage" is sane. Hugepage is something _special_, now.
> > > 
> > Kamezawa-san, 
> > 
> > I agree that hugepages are special in the sense that they are
> > implemented specially and don't actually reside on the LRU like any
> > other locked memory. But, both of these memory types (mlocked and
> > hugepages) are actually unevictable and can't be reclaimed back, so i
> > don't see a reason why should accounting not reflect that.
> > 
> 
> I bet we should rename "Unevictable" to "Mlocked" or "Pinned" rather than
> take nr_hugepages into account. I think this "Unevictable" in meminfo means
> - pages which are evictable in their nature (because in LRU) but a user pinned it -
> 
> How about rename "Unevictable" to "Pinned" or "Locked" ?
> (Mlocked + locked shmem's + ramfs?)
> 

As Lee also pointed out, i don't see why is this # of pages on
unevictable_lru important for the user.
IMO, it doesn't give any useful information, other than confusing us to
believe that only these are unevictable.

Is there something else that I am missing here ?

> We have other "unevictable" pages other than Hugepage anyway.
>  - page table
>  - some slab
>  - kernel's page
>  - anon pages in swapless system
>  etc...

I agree there are these other pages which are unevictable, but they are
pages used by the kernel itself, and they will always be locked/utilized
by the kernel. 
The unevictable pages (hugepages and mlocked and others) on the other
hand are pages which the user explicitly asked to be locked/pinned.

So i think, these other-evictable pages that you mentioned, are
different in a way. 

> 
> BTW, I use following calculation for quick check if I want all "Unevicatable" pages.
> 
> Unevictable = Total - (Active+Inactive) + (50-70%? of slab)
> 
> This # of is not-reclaimable memory.

I don't see how this would get the correct value either, mlocked or
hugepages are not accounted by either of the Active or Inactive regions.


Thanks,
Alok

> 
> Thanks,
> -Kame
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Alok
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Kame
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-23 19:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-22 21:25 [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages Alok Kataria
2009-06-22 21:25 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23  3:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23  3:25   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23  4:46   ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23  4:46     ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23  5:05     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23  5:05       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23  5:11       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23  5:11         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23  5:54         ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23  5:54           ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23  6:06           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23  6:06             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23 19:28             ` Alok Kataria [this message]
2009-06-23 19:28               ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 20:30               ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-23 20:30                 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-23 21:24           ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 21:24             ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 21:42             ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 21:42               ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 21:55               ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 21:55                 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 22:06                 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 22:06                   ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 22:19                   ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:19                     ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:55                   ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 22:55                     ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 23:28                     ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 23:28                       ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 23:48                       ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 23:48                         ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:15               ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:15                 ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:23                 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 22:23                   ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 23:41                   ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 23:41                     ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-24  0:08                     ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-24  0:08                       ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 12:26       ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-23 12:26         ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-29  9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2009-06-29  9:58   ` 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=1245785335.24110.19.camel@alok-dev1 \
    --to=akataria@vmware.com \
    --cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    /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.