From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 21:23:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090707132351.GA6075@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090707184034.0C70.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 05:47:13PM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] vmscan don't isolate too many pages
>
> If the system have plenty threads or processes, concurrent reclaim can
> isolate very much pages.
>
> And if other processes isolate _all_ pages on lru, the reclaimer can't find
> any reclaimable page and it makes accidental OOM.
>
> The solusion is, we should restrict maximum number of isolated pages.
> (this patch use inactive_page/2)
Now I think this is a better solution than per-cpu throttling :)
Will test it tomorrow.
Acked-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
>
> FAQ
> -------
> Q: Why do you compared zone accumulate pages, not individual zone pages?
> A: If we check individual zone, #-of-reclaimer is restricted by smallest zone.
> it mean decreasing the performance of the system having small dma zone.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>
> Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1721,6 +1721,28 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> return alloc_flags;
> }
>
> +static bool too_many_isolated(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> + enum zone_type high_zoneidx, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> +{
> + unsigned long nr_inactive = 0;
> + unsigned long nr_isolated = 0;
> + struct zoneref *z;
> + struct zone *zone;
> +
> + for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> + high_zoneidx, nodemask) {
> + if (!populated_zone(zone))
> + continue;
> +
> + nr_inactive += zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
> + nr_inactive += zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
> + nr_isolated += zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON);
> + nr_isolated += zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE);
> + }
> +
> + return nr_isolated > nr_inactive;
> +}
> +
> static inline struct page *
> __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> struct zonelist *zonelist, enum zone_type high_zoneidx,
> @@ -1789,6 +1811,11 @@ rebalance:
> if (p->flags & PF_MEMALLOC)
> goto nopage;
>
> + if (too_many_isolated(gfp_mask, zonelist, high_zoneidx, nodemask)) {
> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HZ/10);
> + goto restart;
> + }
> +
> /* Try direct reclaim and then allocating */
> page = __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, order,
> zonelist, high_zoneidx,
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 21:23:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090707132351.GA6075@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090707184034.0C70.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 05:47:13PM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] vmscan don't isolate too many pages
>
> If the system have plenty threads or processes, concurrent reclaim can
> isolate very much pages.
>
> And if other processes isolate _all_ pages on lru, the reclaimer can't find
> any reclaimable page and it makes accidental OOM.
>
> The solusion is, we should restrict maximum number of isolated pages.
> (this patch use inactive_page/2)
Now I think this is a better solution than per-cpu throttling :)
Will test it tomorrow.
Acked-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
>
> FAQ
> -------
> Q: Why do you compared zone accumulate pages, not individual zone pages?
> A: If we check individual zone, #-of-reclaimer is restricted by smallest zone.
> it mean decreasing the performance of the system having small dma zone.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>
> Index: b/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1721,6 +1721,28 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> return alloc_flags;
> }
>
> +static bool too_many_isolated(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> + enum zone_type high_zoneidx, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> +{
> + unsigned long nr_inactive = 0;
> + unsigned long nr_isolated = 0;
> + struct zoneref *z;
> + struct zone *zone;
> +
> + for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> + high_zoneidx, nodemask) {
> + if (!populated_zone(zone))
> + continue;
> +
> + nr_inactive += zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_ANON);
> + nr_inactive += zone_page_state(zone, NR_INACTIVE_FILE);
> + nr_isolated += zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON);
> + nr_isolated += zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_FILE);
> + }
> +
> + return nr_isolated > nr_inactive;
> +}
> +
> static inline struct page *
> __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> struct zonelist *zonelist, enum zone_type high_zoneidx,
> @@ -1789,6 +1811,11 @@ rebalance:
> if (p->flags & PF_MEMALLOC)
> goto nopage;
>
> + if (too_many_isolated(gfp_mask, zonelist, high_zoneidx, nodemask)) {
> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HZ/10);
> + goto restart;
> + }
> +
> /* Try direct reclaim and then allocating */
> page = __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, order,
> zonelist, high_zoneidx,
>
--
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:[~2009-07-07 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-07 9:40 [RFC PATCH 0/2] fix unnecessary accidental OOM problem on concurrent reclaim KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 9:40 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 9:47 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 9:47 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 13:23 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2009-07-07 13:23 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-07 18:59 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-07 18:59 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-08 3:19 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-08 3:19 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 1:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages in a zone Rik van Riel
2009-07-09 1:51 ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-09 2:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 2:47 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 3:07 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 3:07 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 7:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 7:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 8:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 8:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 11:07 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09 11:07 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09 6:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 6:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 23:39 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages Minchan Kim
2009-07-07 23:39 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09 3:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 3:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 9:48 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] Don't continue reclaim if the system have plenty free memory KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 9:48 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 13:20 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-07 13:20 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09 5:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 5:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 10:58 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09 10:58 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-13 0:37 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-13 0:37 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
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=20090707132351.GA6075@localhost \
--to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/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.