All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/18] mm, page_alloc: don't retry initial attempt in slowpath
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:58:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <574EF81E.6030402@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160601132643.GP26601@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 06/01/2016 03:26 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-05-16 15:08:03, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index da3a62a94b4a..9f83259a18a8 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -3367,10 +3367,9 @@ __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>>  	bool drained = false;
>>  
>>  	*did_some_progress = __perform_reclaim(gfp_mask, order, ac);
>> -	if (unlikely(!(*did_some_progress)))
>> -		return NULL;
>>  
>>  retry:
>> +	/* We attempt even when no progress, as kswapd might have done some */
>>  	page = get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order, alloc_flags, ac);
> 
> Is this really likely to happen, though? Sure we might have last few
> reclaimable pages on the LRU lists but I am not sure this would make a
> large difference then.
> 
> That being said, I do not think this is harmful but I find it a bit
> weird to invoke a reclaim and then ignore the feedback... Will leave the
> decision up to you but the original patch seemed neater.

OK, I'll think about it.

>>  
>>  	/*
>> @@ -3378,7 +3377,7 @@ __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>>  	 * pages are pinned on the per-cpu lists or in high alloc reserves.
>>  	 * Shrink them them and try again
>>  	 */
>> -	if (!page && !drained) {
>> +	if (!page && *did_some_progress && !drained) {
>>  		unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(ac);
>>  		drain_all_pages(NULL);
>>  		drained = true;
> 
> I do not remember this in the previous version.

Because it's consequence of the new hunk above.

> Why shouldn't we
> unreserve highatomic reserves when there was no progress?

Previously the "return NULL" for no progress would also skip this. So I
wanted to change just the get_page_from_freelist() part. IIUC the
reasoning here is that if there was reclaim progress but we didn't
succeed getting the page, it can mean it's stuck on per-cpu or reserve.
If there was no progress, it's unlikely that anything is stuck there.

--
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: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/18] mm, page_alloc: don't retry initial attempt in slowpath
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:58:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <574EF81E.6030402@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160601132643.GP26601@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 06/01/2016 03:26 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-05-16 15:08:03, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index da3a62a94b4a..9f83259a18a8 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -3367,10 +3367,9 @@ __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>>  	bool drained = false;
>>  
>>  	*did_some_progress = __perform_reclaim(gfp_mask, order, ac);
>> -	if (unlikely(!(*did_some_progress)))
>> -		return NULL;
>>  
>>  retry:
>> +	/* We attempt even when no progress, as kswapd might have done some */
>>  	page = get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order, alloc_flags, ac);
> 
> Is this really likely to happen, though? Sure we might have last few
> reclaimable pages on the LRU lists but I am not sure this would make a
> large difference then.
> 
> That being said, I do not think this is harmful but I find it a bit
> weird to invoke a reclaim and then ignore the feedback... Will leave the
> decision up to you but the original patch seemed neater.

OK, I'll think about it.

>>  
>>  	/*
>> @@ -3378,7 +3377,7 @@ __alloc_pages_direct_reclaim(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>>  	 * pages are pinned on the per-cpu lists or in high alloc reserves.
>>  	 * Shrink them them and try again
>>  	 */
>> -	if (!page && !drained) {
>> +	if (!page && *did_some_progress && !drained) {
>>  		unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(ac);
>>  		drain_all_pages(NULL);
>>  		drained = true;
> 
> I do not remember this in the previous version.

Because it's consequence of the new hunk above.

> Why shouldn't we
> unreserve highatomic reserves when there was no progress?

Previously the "return NULL" for no progress would also skip this. So I
wanted to change just the get_page_from_freelist() part. IIUC the
reasoning here is that if there was reclaim progress but we didn't
succeed getting the page, it can mean it's stuck on per-cpu or reserve.
If there was no progress, it's unlikely that anything is stuck there.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-01 14:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-31 13:08 [PATCH v2 00/18] make direct compaction more deterministic Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 01/18] mm, compaction: don't isolate PageWriteback pages in MIGRATE_SYNC_LIGHT mode Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 02/18] mm, page_alloc: set alloc_flags only once in slowpath Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 03/18] mm, page_alloc: don't retry initial attempt " Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 13:26   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 13:26     ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 14:58     ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2016-06-01 14:58       ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 04/18] mm, page_alloc: restructure direct compaction handling " Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 05/18] mm, page_alloc: make THP-specific decisions more generic Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 06/18] mm, thp: remove __GFP_NORETRY from khugepaged and madvised allocations Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 13:33   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 13:33     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 07/18] mm, compaction: introduce direct compaction priority Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 08/18] mm, compaction: simplify contended compaction handling Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 09/18] mm, compaction: make whole_zone flag ignore cached scanner positions Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 10/18] mm, compaction: cleanup unused functions Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 13:45   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 13:45     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 11/18] mm, compaction: add the ultimate direct compaction priority Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 12/18] mm, compaction: more reliably increase " Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 13:51   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 13:51     ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-23 14:41     ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-23 14:41       ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 13/18] mm, compaction: use correct watermark when checking allocation success Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 13:59   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 13:59     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 14/18] mm, compaction: create compact_gap wrapper Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 14:02   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 14:02     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 15/18] mm, compaction: use proper alloc_flags in __compaction_suitable() Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 16/18] mm, compaction: require only min watermarks for non-costly orders Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 14:08   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 14:08     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 17/18] mm, vmscan: make compaction_ready() more accurate and readable Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 14:14   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 14:14     ` Michal Hocko
2016-05-31 13:08 ` [PATCH v2 18/18] mm, vmscan: use proper classzone_idx in should_continue_reclaim() Vlastimil Babka
2016-05-31 13:08   ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 14:21   ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 14:21     ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 15:19     ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 15:19       ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 15:45       ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-01 15:45         ` Michal Hocko

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=574EF81E.6030402@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.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.