From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Jim Schutt <jaschut@sandia.gov>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under load V3
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:51:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120809145141.GH12690@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5023CADC.801@sandia.gov>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 08:36:12AM -0600, Jim Schutt wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> On 08/09/2012 07:49 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >Changelog since V2
> >o Capture !MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages where possible
> >o Document the treatment of MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages while capturing
> >o Expand changelogs
> >
> >Changelog since V1
> >o Dropped kswapd related patch, basically a no-op and regresses if fixed (minchan)
> >o Expanded changelogs a little
> >
> >Allocation success rates have been far lower since 3.4 due to commit
> >[fe2c2a10: vmscan: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled]. This
> >commit was introduced for good reasons and it was known in advance that
> >the success rates would suffer but it was justified on the grounds that
> >the high allocation success rates were achieved by aggressive reclaim.
> >Success rates are expected to suffer even more in 3.6 due to commit
> >[7db8889a: mm: have order> 0 compaction start off where it left] which
> >testing has shown to severely reduce allocation success rates under load -
> >to 0% in one case. There is a proposed change to that patch in this series
> >and it would be ideal if Jim Schutt could retest the workload that led to
> >commit [7db8889a: mm: have order> 0 compaction start off where it left].
>
> I was successful at resolving my Ceph issue on 3.6-rc1, but ran
> into some other issue that isn't immediately obvious, and prevents
> me from testing your patch with 3.6-rc1. Today I will apply your
> patch series to 3.5 and test that way.
>
> Sorry for the delay.
>
No need to be sorry at all. I appreciate you taking the time and as
there were revisions since V1 you were better off waiting even if you
did not have the Ceph issue!
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Jim Schutt <jaschut@sandia.gov>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under load V3
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:51:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120809145141.GH12690@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5023CADC.801@sandia.gov>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 08:36:12AM -0600, Jim Schutt wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> On 08/09/2012 07:49 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >Changelog since V2
> >o Capture !MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages where possible
> >o Document the treatment of MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages while capturing
> >o Expand changelogs
> >
> >Changelog since V1
> >o Dropped kswapd related patch, basically a no-op and regresses if fixed (minchan)
> >o Expanded changelogs a little
> >
> >Allocation success rates have been far lower since 3.4 due to commit
> >[fe2c2a10: vmscan: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled]. This
> >commit was introduced for good reasons and it was known in advance that
> >the success rates would suffer but it was justified on the grounds that
> >the high allocation success rates were achieved by aggressive reclaim.
> >Success rates are expected to suffer even more in 3.6 due to commit
> >[7db8889a: mm: have order> 0 compaction start off where it left] which
> >testing has shown to severely reduce allocation success rates under load -
> >to 0% in one case. There is a proposed change to that patch in this series
> >and it would be ideal if Jim Schutt could retest the workload that led to
> >commit [7db8889a: mm: have order> 0 compaction start off where it left].
>
> I was successful at resolving my Ceph issue on 3.6-rc1, but ran
> into some other issue that isn't immediately obvious, and prevents
> me from testing your patch with 3.6-rc1. Today I will apply your
> patch series to 3.5 and test that way.
>
> Sorry for the delay.
>
No need to be sorry at all. I appreciate you taking the time and as
there were revisions since V1 you were better off waiting even if you
did not have the Ceph issue!
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-09 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-09 13:49 [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under load V3 Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm: compaction: Update comment in try_to_compact_pages Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: vmscan: Scale number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction based on failures Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-10 8:49 ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-10 8:49 ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: compaction: Capture a suitable high-order page immediately when it is made available Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 23:35 ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-09 23:35 ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm: have order > 0 compaction start off where it left Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: have order > 0 compaction start near a pageblock with free pages Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 13:49 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 14:36 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under load V3 Jim Schutt
2012-08-09 14:36 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-09 14:51 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2012-08-09 14:51 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 18:16 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-09 18:16 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-09 20:46 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 20:46 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-09 22:38 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-09 22:38 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-10 11:02 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-10 11:02 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-10 17:20 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-10 17:20 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-12 20:22 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-12 20:22 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-13 20:35 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-13 20:35 ` Jim Schutt
2012-08-14 9:23 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-14 9:23 ` 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=20120809145141.GH12690@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=jaschut@sandia.gov \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--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.