From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f174.google.com (mail-pl1-f174.google.com [209.85.214.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B2D719E839 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2026 02:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776736917; cv=none; b=t4bG5CPAdhvz9Q4IVqRTY515/iCRSVDf4zl4N6+qM0OvwhumB9nxUhgF15a+ymMuSWsNIINX9koVyEdSgRrpnkoriKvx7Hgeq9IP2khDg0niOJk34z42R7u0IreH8y5gZm3KLk+2mPHTEm90B0DeBHlxxAFJ6RMfAvY2r+IZ4Mw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776736917; c=relaxed/simple; bh=l9bRz9UeCPAV9DA8Zy5r0ie/prB1/Xr8Z+QnqVjykhA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=YTksbPcsLw6S5nA/qaMckbJFGYgVDw3SFRcGL1YxeEfQBa39tBVojBaxnSuteABEZydwpo2VpbOi4Pj9MarR1uLk6nJoYBunUG+HmVl94Jf+F64Qai6ELZ9jK+uBLIfpIWSiAgjUC1rB71hNm1sYaoh6QFbioCD0ZqHl4uufYTI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=XskVbg+B; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="XskVbg+B" Received: by mail-pl1-f174.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2b2503753efso36043965ad.0 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 19:01:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1776736915; x=1777341715; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HAfyiA5fxqYXT4gYRX9zfWikwnCgQwE5e6No9OGkL8Y=; b=XskVbg+BJsj32X8H+Rf6+BXY8Llvyd4yvTB+mmbWcDkA4v3GBhKwVjRazy9zkOig2F AU6Fkl9QCa2PEDPsghPR4e3v64RfZoq7mjp8DkxoGFQv/yfhWgiDQZ4umrmGHfjos8Nj 7B0KwN9ejXrLewIz+edRFUmOl8F81dtnlpQV6qAkW1NfsS8s3xh1PZgbRHfwA12NxAUy fL4Xm3DisCW9om0yRpixnwxFLAjdgLCakxCQDVMatIqYPxBSiRZaNsfDNI5N1aMuiQz9 38EozjmEDteXe24b68MG4VTErQ64u7m8Hu7zJNcVw3DJb05GLVtll5pTE+PxUUBpkSpz cEKQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1776736915; x=1777341715; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HAfyiA5fxqYXT4gYRX9zfWikwnCgQwE5e6No9OGkL8Y=; b=CeUEFWD0RodNXW/Cu4wv7YsSdwECXPGoxTA+MMyJzBPfPAC7m2BOInoIN3LaR5sLEj FYO2K9rdNYP0kd2TSbXqVeu4Y4/uCt3utdrDKq/OaPwCTfsmKCIey8RqS6hzeMkTzmRr 3CQaNWK31UpieiRqSicvb1DFG8OG8rfMm8gTrNrXcQtmZRC6l9ZdaJpGutq2ysLJe41u sV9dO4p5eW27y0x0nLo7o0ZjN6Lywo1qluR200oxXzfbvGh220idH+ybCIMTLs8uhCG9 8cysKUx0RPBMkjbTvi4wocKC0qsjeaEsW6b3wVr+lPCpSLllOXttf3Ndvnxsiw0EfThi je2g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ9s/UIMZ96uDPJ43+PIoJWbOvL7mu0Tb3XveXve73E4AkwmsJN054l8gPQqWFiX+48xOkN0z6smHvSNyEI7@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwENlJQzT/XouFG8hY5X8W5vytTnybyAe3ruO+g/7lK3EV+Q4yw MSGrdCG5s8tHxOnoSa62+4BN/36T0w/rMqMOOTBqMtIC9EfN+qztrzL9 X-Gm-Gg: AeBDiet3JYdGKU2lOlAHMnol1M3ibv3HYOa5KtRM9Skd0fzt1Jf9wP19hKKVzNZYNoJ bJ/qgk8y3J2d0bCS1/Ze7GgEvx9XwjM53MJ30RpuSB6Whkr2ww1hzLk6/WwvngQ+uJHvXn7qEHQ tpd2bkBPr9FxURopMGybF13DwvS8KHcUhAzpxRKujOORChr1xblKFlrUutcWL/MxMq18/FdsGxB 8voH0O34qmlZ2YOK1tFCDiWwNogtkNYFmuyYhhibxTR5hVvrSIVsy/s1NU7RwJUt2CrWLaCOST2 SxijLXKKNYNaLUEYyTaE3X0zAhHnZvsghUvFN6kmgvgVeSp0YUv2+n2c7zaBs7XEQvJFO6kUDex TFEgsN3oAZgBLbDNFPgIj1YZFKtRLAV7TzJQQusQ3SKEoQGiYHM6T9NxfTrT/ZHrSlefzOIs2Hp WBusrXaSIYQqNSCv2zdB7hTqnndXDTUkKF X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:1988:b0:2b4:5cea:f618 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2b5f9e7823fmr164463225ad.3.1776736915460; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 19:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pve-server ([49.205.216.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-2b5fa9ff3b4sm149129515ad.2.2026.04.20.19.01.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 20 Apr 2026 19:01:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) To: Salvatore Dipietro Cc: Matthew Wilcox , abuehaze@amazon.de, alisaidi@amazon.com, blakgeof@amazon.com, brauner@kernel.org, dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com, djwong@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iomap: avoid compaction for costly folio order allocation In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 06:46:19 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20260420163328.22104-1-dipiets@amazon.it> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Matthew Wilcox writes: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 04:33:28PM +0000, Salvatore Dipietro wrote: >> I have submitted a v2 of the patch based on Ritesh's suggestion. >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260420161404.642-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u > > ... but without linking back to this thread, so nobody who was exposed > to that thread for the first time knows about this one. That's poor form. Yup. Also, given the Maintainers (willy, Christoph, Dave) shown their dis-interest in taking the patch in it's current form, the right way is to get back with performance data with both the approaches (which we were discussing) and first get the consensus from everyone, before proposing this as a patch :). Having said that, we do care if a genuine performance issue gets reported. In that context, I wanted to understand your setup a bit from memory fragmentation perspective. Are you trying to simulate memory fragmentation and then benchmarking? Or was this problem hitting when you run simply run the reproduction steps mentioned in your cover letter? BTW - I was following the other thread too where PREEMPT_LAZY problem was getting discussed. And from what I understood, you mentioned [1] enabling THP on the system made that problem go away. Also it looks like enabling THP is the right thing to do for this kind of workload. Does that also mean enabling THP fixed this problem too? Do you still hit memory fragmentation and/or similar throughput drop w/o this fix after you enable THP? It will be good to know those details too please. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260403191942.21410-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#md88ca4258766e897e432df85874d197db476c7d1 -ritesh