From: Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages.
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:28:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1245785335.24110.19.camel@alok-dev1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090623150630.31c0dff5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 23:06 -0700, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:54:01 -0700
> Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > I don't have any strong oppose reason, but I also don't have any strong
> > > > agree reason.
> > > >
> > > I think "don't include Hugepage" is sane. Hugepage is something _special_, now.
> > >
> > Kamezawa-san,
> >
> > I agree that hugepages are special in the sense that they are
> > implemented specially and don't actually reside on the LRU like any
> > other locked memory. But, both of these memory types (mlocked and
> > hugepages) are actually unevictable and can't be reclaimed back, so i
> > don't see a reason why should accounting not reflect that.
> >
>
> I bet we should rename "Unevictable" to "Mlocked" or "Pinned" rather than
> take nr_hugepages into account. I think this "Unevictable" in meminfo means
> - pages which are evictable in their nature (because in LRU) but a user pinned it -
>
> How about rename "Unevictable" to "Pinned" or "Locked" ?
> (Mlocked + locked shmem's + ramfs?)
>
As Lee also pointed out, i don't see why is this # of pages on
unevictable_lru important for the user.
IMO, it doesn't give any useful information, other than confusing us to
believe that only these are unevictable.
Is there something else that I am missing here ?
> We have other "unevictable" pages other than Hugepage anyway.
> - page table
> - some slab
> - kernel's page
> - anon pages in swapless system
> etc...
I agree there are these other pages which are unevictable, but they are
pages used by the kernel itself, and they will always be locked/utilized
by the kernel.
The unevictable pages (hugepages and mlocked and others) on the other
hand are pages which the user explicitly asked to be locked/pinned.
So i think, these other-evictable pages that you mentioned, are
different in a way.
>
> BTW, I use following calculation for quick check if I want all "Unevicatable" pages.
>
> Unevictable = Total - (Active+Inactive) + (50-70%? of slab)
>
> This # of is not-reclaimable memory.
I don't see how this would get the correct value either, mlocked or
hugepages are not accounted by either of the Active or Inactive regions.
Thanks,
Alok
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
>
> > Thanks,
> > Alok
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Kame
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
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:[~2009-06-23 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-22 21:25 [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 3:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23 4:46 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 5:05 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-06-23 5:11 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23 5:54 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 6:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-23 19:28 ` Alok Kataria [this message]
2009-06-23 20:30 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-23 21:24 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 21:42 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 21:55 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 22:06 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 22:19 ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:55 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-23 23:28 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 23:48 ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:15 ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-23 22:23 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 23:41 ` Dave Hansen
2009-06-24 0:08 ` Alok Kataria
2009-06-23 12:26 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2009-06-29 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
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=1245785335.24110.19.camel@alok-dev1 \
--to=akataria@vmware.com \
--cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).