From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.247]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132D26B0023 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 04:18:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [patch 5/5]thp: split huge page if head page is isolated From: Shaohua Li In-Reply-To: <20111028073026.GB6268@barrios-laptop.redhat.com> References: <1319511580.22361.141.camel@sli10-conroe> <20111027233407.GC29407@barrios-laptop.redhat.com> <1319778715.22361.155.camel@sli10-conroe> <20111028073026.GB6268@barrios-laptop.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:25:56 +0800 Message-ID: <1319790356.22361.165.camel@sli10-conroe> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , "aarcange@redhat.com" , Hugh Dickins , Rik van Riel , mel , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-mm , lkml On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 15:30 +0800, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:11:55PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 07:34 +0800, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:40AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > > With current logic, if page reclaim finds a huge page, it will just reclaim > > > > the head page and leave tail pages reclaimed later. Let's take an example, > > > > lru list has page A and B, page A is huge page: > > > > 1. page A is isolated > > > > 2. page B is isolated > > > > 3. shrink_page_list() adds page A to swap page cache. so page A is split. > > > > page A+1, page A+2, ... are added to lru list. > > > > 4. shrink_page_list() adds page B to swap page cache. > > > > 5. page A and B is written out and reclaimed. > > > > 6. page A+1, A+2 ... is isolated and reclaimed later. > > > > So the reclaim order is A, B, ...(maybe other pages), A+1, A+2 ... > > > > > > I don't see your code yet but have a question. > > > You mitigate this problem by 4/5 which could add subpages into lru tail > > > so subpages would reclaim next interation of reclaim. > > > > > > What do we need 5/5? > > > Do I miss something? > > Both patches are required. without this patch, current page reclaim will > > only reclaim the first page of a huge page, because the hugepage isn't > > split yet. The hugepage is split when the first page is being written to > > swap, which is too later and page reclaim might already isolated a lot > > of pages. > > When split happens, subpages would be located in tail of LRU by your 4/5. > (Assume tail of LRU is old age). yes, but a lot of other pages already isolated. we will reclaim those pages first. for example, reclaim huge page A, B. current reclaim order is A, B, A+1, ... B+1, because we will isolated A and B first, all tail pages are not isolated yet. While with my patch, the order is A, A +1, ... B, B+1,.... with my patch, we can avoid unnecessary page split or page isolation. This is exactly why my patch reduces the thp_split count. > In addtion, isolation happens 32 page chunk so the subpages would be isolated > and reclaimed in next iteration. I think 32 pages are not too many. > > What do you think about it? since headpage and tailpages are in different list, the 32 chunk will not include tailpages. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org