From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:53:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140203095329.GH6732@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402012145510.2593@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 09:46:26PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> Page migration will fail for memory that is pinned in memory with, for
> example, get_user_pages(). In this case, it is unnecessary to take
> zone->lru_lock or isolating the page and passing it to page migration
> which will ultimately fail.
>
> This is a racy check, the page can still change from under us, but in
> that case we'll just fail later when attempting to move the page.
>
> This avoids very expensive memory compaction when faulting transparent
> hugepages after pinning a lot of memory with a Mellanox driver.
>
> On a 128GB machine and pinning ~120GB of memory, before this patch we
> see the enormous disparity in the number of page migration failures
> because of the pinning (from /proc/vmstat):
>
> compact_blocks_moved 7609
> compact_pages_moved 3431
> compact_pagemigrate_failed 133219
> compact_stall 13
>
> After the patch, it is much more efficient:
>
> compact_blocks_moved 7998
> compact_pages_moved 6403
> compact_pagemigrate_failed 3
> compact_stall 15
>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> ---
> mm/compaction.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -578,6 +578,14 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct zone *zone, struct compact_control *cc,
> continue;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Migration will fail if an anonymous page is pinned in memory,
> + * so avoid taking zone->lru_lock and isolating it unnecessarily
> + * in an admittedly racy check.
> + */
> + if (!page_mapping(page) && page_count(page))
> + continue;
> +
Are you sure about this? The page_count check migration does is this
int expected_count = 1 + extra_count;
if (!mapping) {
if (page_count(page) != expected_count)
return -EAGAIN;
return MIGRATEPAGE_SUCCESS;
}
spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
pslot = radix_tree_lookup_slot(&mapping->page_tree,
page_index(page));
expected_count += 1 + page_has_private(page);
Migration expects and can migrate pages with no mapping and a page count
but you are now skipping them. I think you may have intended to split
migrations page count into a helper or copy the logic.
--
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: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:53:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140203095329.GH6732@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402012145510.2593@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 09:46:26PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> Page migration will fail for memory that is pinned in memory with, for
> example, get_user_pages(). In this case, it is unnecessary to take
> zone->lru_lock or isolating the page and passing it to page migration
> which will ultimately fail.
>
> This is a racy check, the page can still change from under us, but in
> that case we'll just fail later when attempting to move the page.
>
> This avoids very expensive memory compaction when faulting transparent
> hugepages after pinning a lot of memory with a Mellanox driver.
>
> On a 128GB machine and pinning ~120GB of memory, before this patch we
> see the enormous disparity in the number of page migration failures
> because of the pinning (from /proc/vmstat):
>
> compact_blocks_moved 7609
> compact_pages_moved 3431
> compact_pagemigrate_failed 133219
> compact_stall 13
>
> After the patch, it is much more efficient:
>
> compact_blocks_moved 7998
> compact_pages_moved 6403
> compact_pagemigrate_failed 3
> compact_stall 15
>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> ---
> mm/compaction.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -578,6 +578,14 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct zone *zone, struct compact_control *cc,
> continue;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Migration will fail if an anonymous page is pinned in memory,
> + * so avoid taking zone->lru_lock and isolating it unnecessarily
> + * in an admittedly racy check.
> + */
> + if (!page_mapping(page) && page_count(page))
> + continue;
> +
Are you sure about this? The page_count check migration does is this
int expected_count = 1 + extra_count;
if (!mapping) {
if (page_count(page) != expected_count)
return -EAGAIN;
return MIGRATEPAGE_SUCCESS;
}
spin_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
pslot = radix_tree_lookup_slot(&mapping->page_tree,
page_index(page));
expected_count += 1 + page_has_private(page);
Migration expects and can migrate pages with no mapping and a page count
but you are now skipping them. I think you may have intended to split
migrations page count into a helper or copy the logic.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-03 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-02 5:46 [patch] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages David Rientjes
2014-02-02 5:46 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-03 9:53 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2014-02-03 9:53 ` Mel Gorman
2014-02-03 10:49 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-03 10:49 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 0:02 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 0:02 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 1:20 ` [patch] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages fix David Rientjes
2014-02-04 1:20 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 1:53 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 1:53 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 2:00 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 2:00 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 2:15 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 2:15 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-04 2:50 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 2:50 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 3:47 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-04 3:47 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-05 2:44 ` [patch v2] mm, compaction: avoid isolating pinned pages David Rientjes
2014-02-05 2:44 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-05 20:56 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-05 20:56 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-06 0:05 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 0:05 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 1:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-06 1:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-06 13:53 ` Mel Gorman
2014-02-06 13:53 ` Mel Gorman
2014-02-06 18:48 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-02-06 18:48 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-02-06 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-04 2:44 ` [patch] " Hugh Dickins
2014-02-04 2:44 ` Hugh Dickins
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=20140203095329.GH6732@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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.