All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, minchan@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jaschut@sandia.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] mm: have order>0 compaction start off where it left
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:30:50 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FEC86BA.9050004@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120628102919.GQ8103@csn.ul.ie>

On 06/28/2012 06:29 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:

> Lets say there are two parallel compactions running. Process A meets
> the migration PFN and moves to the end of the zone to restart. Process B
> finishes scanning mid-way through the zone and updates last_free_pfn. This
> will cause Process A to "jump" to where Process B left off which is not
> necessarily desirable.
>
> Another side effect is that a workload that allocations/frees
> aggressively will not compact as well as the "free" scanner is not
> scanning the end of the zone each time. It would be better if
> last_free_pfn was updated when a full pageblock was encountered
>
> So;
>
> 1. Initialise last_free_pfn to the end of the zone
> 2. On compaction, scan from last_free_pfn and record where it started
> 3. If a pageblock is full, update last_free_pfn
> 4. If the migration and free scanner meet, reset last_free_pfn and
>     the free scanner. Abort if the free scanner wraps to where it started
>
> Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes sense.  We still have to keep track
of whether we have wrapped around, but I guess that
allows for a better name for the bool :)

Maybe cc->wrapped?

Does anyone have a better name?

As for point (4), should we abort when we wrap
around to where we started, or should we abort
when free_pfn and migrate_pfn meet after we
wrapped around?

>> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
>> index 2ba87fb..b041874 100644
>> --- a/mm/internal.h
>> +++ b/mm/internal.h
>> @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ struct compact_control {
>>   	unsigned long free_pfn;		/* isolate_freepages search base */
>>   	unsigned long migrate_pfn;	/* isolate_migratepages search base */
>>   	bool sync;			/* Synchronous migration */
>> +	bool last_round;		/* Last round for order>0 compaction */
>>
>
> I don't get what you mean by last_round. Did you mean "wrapped". When
> false, it means the free scanner started from last_pfn and when true it
> means it started from last_pfn, met the migrate scanner and wrapped
> around to the end of the zone?

Yes, I do mean "wrapped" :)

-- 
All rights reversed

--
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: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, minchan@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jaschut@sandia.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] mm: have order>0 compaction start off where it left
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:30:50 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FEC86BA.9050004@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120628102919.GQ8103@csn.ul.ie>

On 06/28/2012 06:29 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:

> Lets say there are two parallel compactions running. Process A meets
> the migration PFN and moves to the end of the zone to restart. Process B
> finishes scanning mid-way through the zone and updates last_free_pfn. This
> will cause Process A to "jump" to where Process B left off which is not
> necessarily desirable.
>
> Another side effect is that a workload that allocations/frees
> aggressively will not compact as well as the "free" scanner is not
> scanning the end of the zone each time. It would be better if
> last_free_pfn was updated when a full pageblock was encountered
>
> So;
>
> 1. Initialise last_free_pfn to the end of the zone
> 2. On compaction, scan from last_free_pfn and record where it started
> 3. If a pageblock is full, update last_free_pfn
> 4. If the migration and free scanner meet, reset last_free_pfn and
>     the free scanner. Abort if the free scanner wraps to where it started
>
> Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes sense.  We still have to keep track
of whether we have wrapped around, but I guess that
allows for a better name for the bool :)

Maybe cc->wrapped?

Does anyone have a better name?

As for point (4), should we abort when we wrap
around to where we started, or should we abort
when free_pfn and migrate_pfn meet after we
wrapped around?

>> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
>> index 2ba87fb..b041874 100644
>> --- a/mm/internal.h
>> +++ b/mm/internal.h
>> @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ struct compact_control {
>>   	unsigned long free_pfn;		/* isolate_freepages search base */
>>   	unsigned long migrate_pfn;	/* isolate_migratepages search base */
>>   	bool sync;			/* Synchronous migration */
>> +	bool last_round;		/* Last round for order>0 compaction */
>>
>
> I don't get what you mean by last_round. Did you mean "wrapped". When
> false, it means the free scanner started from last_pfn and when true it
> means it started from last_pfn, met the migrate scanner and wrapped
> around to the end of the zone?

Yes, I do mean "wrapped" :)

-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-28 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-28  3:37 [PATCH -mm] mm: have order>0 compaction start off where it left Rik van Riel
2012-06-28  3:37 ` Rik van Riel
2012-06-28 10:29 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-28 10:29   ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-28 16:30   ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2012-06-28 16:30     ` Rik van Riel
2012-06-29  2:58     ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-29  2:58       ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-28 17:16 ` Jim Schutt
2012-06-28 17:16   ` Jim Schutt
2012-06-28 17:25   ` Rik van Riel
2012-06-28 17:25     ` Rik van Riel

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=4FEC86BA.9050004@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jaschut@sandia.gov \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    /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.