All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Charan Teja Kalla <charante@codeaurora.org>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com,
	khalid.aziz@oracle.com, ngupta@nitingupta.dev,
	vinmenon@codeaurora.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] mm/compaction: correct deferral logic for proactive compaction
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 21:17:58 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ce8f4f1-0d83-bb85-e516-33071d85ad3a@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <627a82ec-94ef-a233-4637-28bc82a886e9@google.com>



On 1/25/2021 4:24 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> 
>> On 1/19/21 8:26 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, Charan Teja Reddy wrote:
>>>
>>>> should_proactive_compact_node() returns true when sum of the
>>>> weighted fragmentation score of all the zones in the node is greater
>>>> than the wmark_high of compaction, which then triggers the proactive
>>>> compaction that operates on the individual zones of the node. But
>>>> proactive compaction runs on the zone only when its weighted
>>>> fragmentation score is greater than wmark_low(=wmark_high - 10).
>>>>
>>>> This means that the sum of the weighted fragmentation scores of all the
>>>> zones can exceed the wmark_high but individual weighted fragmentation
>>>> zone scores can still be less than wmark_low which makes the unnecessary
>>>> trigger of the proactive compaction only to return doing nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Issue with the return of proactive compaction with out even trying is
>>>> its deferral. It is simply deferred for 1 << COMPACT_MAX_DEFER_SHIFT if
>>>> the scores across the proactive compaction is same, thinking that
>>>> compaction didn't make any progress but in reality it didn't even try.
>>>
>>> Isn't this an issue in deferred compaction as well?  It seems like 
>>> deferred compaction should check that work was actually performed before 
>>> deferring subsequent calls to compaction.
>>
>> Direct compaction does, proactive not.
>>
>>> In other words, I don't believe deferred compaction is intended to avoid 
>>> checks to determine if compaction is worth it; it should only defer 
>>> *additional* work that was not productive.
>>
>> Yeah, that should be more optimal.
>>
> 
> Charan, is this something you'd like to follow up on, or should I take a 
> look instead?
> 

Sure David. Happy to follow up on this. Thanks!

> Thanks!
> 

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-27 15:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-18 17:12 [PATCH V3] mm/compaction: correct deferral logic for proactive compaction Charan Teja Reddy
2021-01-18 17:41 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-19 15:42 ` Khalid Aziz
2021-01-19 19:26 ` David Rientjes
2021-01-20 11:04   ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-24 22:54     ` David Rientjes
2021-01-27 15:47       ` Charan Teja Kalla [this message]
2021-01-25 15:56 ` Vlastimil Babka

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=7ce8f4f1-0d83-bb85-e516-33071d85ad3a@codeaurora.org \
    --to=charante@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=khalid.aziz@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=ngupta@nitingupta.dev \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=vinmenon@codeaurora.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.