From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: "Rohit, Seth" <rohit.seth@intel.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 12:33:36 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4362DF80.3060802@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051028183326.A28611@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
Rohit, Seth wrote:
> the only changes in this clean up are:
>
Looking good. I imagine it must be good for icache.
Man, the page allocator somehow turned unreadable since I last
looked at it! We will want this patch.
> 1- remove the initial direct reclaim logic
> 2- GFP_HIGH pages are allowed to go little below low watermark sooner
I don't think #2 is any good. The reason we don't check GFP_HIGH on
the first time round is because we simply want to kick kswapd at its
normal watermark - ie. it doesn't matter what kind of allocation this
is, kswapd should start at the same time no matter what.
If you don't do this, then a GFP_HIGH allocator can allocate right
down to its limit before it kicks kswapd, then it either will fail or
will have to do direct reclaim.
I would be inclined to simply add a int gfp_high argument to
get_page_from_freelist, which would also somewhat match zone_watermark_ok.
> 3- Search for free pages unconditionally after direct reclaim
>
> I've not added the logic of looking into PCPs first in this rev of patch. I will send a
> seperate patch for adding that support (needing extra logic for NUMA).
>
> Signed-off-by: Rohit Seth <rohit.seth@intel.com>
>
One other comment below:
> +
> +static struct page *
> +get_page_from_freelist(unsigned int __nocast gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> + struct zone **zones, int can_try_harder)
> +{
> + struct zone *z;
> + struct page *page = NULL;
> + int classzone_idx = zone_idx(zones[0]);
> + int i;
> +
> + /*
> + * Go through the zonelist once, looking for a zone with enough free.
> + * See also cpuset_zone_allowed() comment in kernel/cpuset.c.
> + */
> + for (i = 0; (z = zones[i]) != NULL; i++) {
> + if (!cpuset_zone_allowed(z, gfp_mask))
> + continue;
> +
> + if ((can_try_harder >= 0) &&
> + (!zone_watermark_ok(z, order, z->pages_low,
> + classzone_idx, can_try_harder,
> + gfp_mask & __GFP_HIGH)))
> + continue;
> +
> + page = buffered_rmqueue(z, order, gfp_mask, 1);
> + if (page)
> + break;
> + }
> + return page;
> +}
[snip]
> @@ -968,7 +931,7 @@
> }
> return NULL;
> got_pg:
> - zone_statistics(zonelist, z);
> + zone_statistics(zonelist, page_zone(page));
> return page;
How about moving the zone_statistics up into the 'if (page)'
test of get_page_from_freelist? This way we don't have to
evaluate page_zone().
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: "Rohit, Seth" <rohit.seth@intel.com>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 12:33:36 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4362DF80.3060802@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051028183326.A28611@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
Rohit, Seth wrote:
> the only changes in this clean up are:
>
Looking good. I imagine it must be good for icache.
Man, the page allocator somehow turned unreadable since I last
looked at it! We will want this patch.
> 1- remove the initial direct reclaim logic
> 2- GFP_HIGH pages are allowed to go little below low watermark sooner
I don't think #2 is any good. The reason we don't check GFP_HIGH on
the first time round is because we simply want to kick kswapd at its
normal watermark - ie. it doesn't matter what kind of allocation this
is, kswapd should start at the same time no matter what.
If you don't do this, then a GFP_HIGH allocator can allocate right
down to its limit before it kicks kswapd, then it either will fail or
will have to do direct reclaim.
I would be inclined to simply add a int gfp_high argument to
get_page_from_freelist, which would also somewhat match zone_watermark_ok.
> 3- Search for free pages unconditionally after direct reclaim
>
> I've not added the logic of looking into PCPs first in this rev of patch. I will send a
> seperate patch for adding that support (needing extra logic for NUMA).
>
> Signed-off-by: Rohit Seth <rohit.seth@intel.com>
>
One other comment below:
> +
> +static struct page *
> +get_page_from_freelist(unsigned int __nocast gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> + struct zone **zones, int can_try_harder)
> +{
> + struct zone *z;
> + struct page *page = NULL;
> + int classzone_idx = zone_idx(zones[0]);
> + int i;
> +
> + /*
> + * Go through the zonelist once, looking for a zone with enough free.
> + * See also cpuset_zone_allowed() comment in kernel/cpuset.c.
> + */
> + for (i = 0; (z = zones[i]) != NULL; i++) {
> + if (!cpuset_zone_allowed(z, gfp_mask))
> + continue;
> +
> + if ((can_try_harder >= 0) &&
> + (!zone_watermark_ok(z, order, z->pages_low,
> + classzone_idx, can_try_harder,
> + gfp_mask & __GFP_HIGH)))
> + continue;
> +
> + page = buffered_rmqueue(z, order, gfp_mask, 1);
> + if (page)
> + break;
> + }
> + return page;
> +}
[snip]
> @@ -968,7 +931,7 @@
> }
> return NULL;
> got_pg:
> - zone_statistics(zonelist, z);
> + zone_statistics(zonelist, page_zone(page));
> return page;
How about moving the zone_statistics up into the 'if (page)'
test of get_page_from_freelist? This way we don't have to
evaluate page_zone().
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
--
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:[~2005-10-29 2:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-29 1:33 [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages Rohit, Seth
2005-10-29 1:33 ` Rohit, Seth
2005-10-29 2:33 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2005-10-29 2:33 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-31 20:55 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-31 20:55 ` Rohit Seth
2005-11-01 1:14 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-01 1:14 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-04 18:15 ` Rohit Seth
2005-11-04 18:15 ` Rohit Seth
2005-11-05 0:00 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-05 0:00 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 0:16 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 0:16 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-31 19:09 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-31 19:09 ` Rohit Seth
2005-11-05 17:09 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-05 17:09 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-06 4:18 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-06 4:18 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-06 17:35 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-06 17:35 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-06 20:49 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-06 20:49 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 2:57 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 2:57 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 3:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-07 3:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-11-07 4:37 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 4:37 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 6:08 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 6:08 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 9:46 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 9:46 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 10:17 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 10:17 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-07 14:41 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 14:41 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 3:44 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-07 3:44 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 1:47 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 1:47 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 2:01 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 2:01 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 2:19 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 2:19 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 2:32 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 2:32 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 3:06 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 3:06 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 3:53 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 3:53 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 2:26 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 2:26 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 2:36 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 2:36 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 3:09 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 3:09 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 3:55 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 3:55 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-30 4:11 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-30 4:11 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-31 21:20 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-31 21:20 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-31 21:28 ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-31 21:28 ` Paul Jackson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-05 1:57 Seth, Rohit
2005-11-05 1:57 ` Seth, Rohit
2005-10-01 19:00 Seth, Rohit
2005-10-01 19:00 ` Seth, Rohit
2005-10-02 3:09 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-02 3:09 ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-03 16:50 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-03 16:50 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-03 15:34 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-10-03 15:34 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-10-03 16:55 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-03 16:55 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-03 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-10-03 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-10-03 17:48 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-03 17:48 ` Rohit Seth
2005-10-04 13:27 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-04 13:27 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-04 16:26 ` Ray Bryant
2005-10-04 16:26 ` Ray Bryant
2005-10-04 16:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-04 16:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-04 17:02 ` Ray Bryant
2005-10-04 17:02 ` Ray Bryant
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=4362DF80.3060802@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rohit.seth@intel.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.