linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/14] Add a tunable that decides when memory should be compacted and when it should be reclaimed
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:11:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100407161143.GU17882@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100406170613.9b80c7ea.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 05:06:13PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri,  2 Apr 2010 17:02:46 +0100
> Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
> 
> > The kernel applies some heuristics when deciding if memory should be
> > compacted or reclaimed to satisfy a high-order allocation. One of these
> > is based on the fragmentation. If the index is below 500, memory will
> > not be compacted. This choice is arbitrary and not based on data. To
> > help optimise the system and set a sensible default for this value, this
> > patch adds a sysctl extfrag_threshold. The kernel will only compact
> > memory if the fragmentation index is above the extfrag_threshold.
> 
> Was this the most robust, reliable, no-2am-phone-calls thing we could
> have done?
> 
> What about, say, just doing a bit of both until something worked? 

I guess you could but that is not a million miles away from what
currently happens.

This heuristic is basically "based on free memory layout, how likely is
compaction to succeed?". It makes a decision based on that. A later
patch then checks if the guess was right. If not, just try direct
reclaim for a bit before trying compaction again.

> For
> extra smarts we could remember what worked best last time, and make
> ourselves more likely to try that next time.
> 

With the later patch, this is essentially what we do. Granted we
remember the opposite "If the kernel guesses wrong, then don't compact
for a short while before trying again".

> Or whatever, but extfrag_threshold must die!  And replacing it with a
> hardwired constant doesn't count ;)
> 

I think what you have in mind is "just try compaction every time" but my
concern about that is we'll hit a corner case where a lot of CPU time is
taken scanning zones uselessly. That is what this heuristic and the
back-off logic in a later patch was meant to avoid. I haven't thought of
a better alternative :/

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-07 16:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-02 16:02 [PATCH 0/14] Memory Compaction v7 Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 01/14] mm,migration: Take a reference to the anon_vma before migrating Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07  9:56     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 02/14] mm,migration: Do not try to migrate unmapped anonymous pages Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 03/14] mm: Share the anon_vma ref counts between KSM and page migration Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07  0:10     ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-07 10:01     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 04/14] Allow CONFIG_MIGRATION to be set without CONFIG_NUMA or memory hot-remove Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 10:22     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 05/14] Export unusable free space index via /proc/unusable_index Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 10:35     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 12:42     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 06/14] Export fragmentation index via /proc/extfrag_index Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 10:46     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 12:43     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 07/14] Move definition for LRU isolation modes to a header Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 08/14] Memory compaction core Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 15:21     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-08 16:59   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-08 17:06     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 09/14] Add /proc trigger for memory compaction Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 15:39     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-07 18:27       ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 10/14] Add /sys trigger for per-node " Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:05   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07  0:31     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-06 21:56       ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07  1:19         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-07 15:42     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 11/14] Direct compact when a high-order allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:06   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 16:06     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-07 18:29     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 12/14] Add a tunable that decides when memory should be compacted and when it should be reclaimed Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:06   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 16:11     ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 13/14] Do not compact within a preferred zone after a compaction failure Mel Gorman
2010-04-07  0:06   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07  0:55     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-04-07 16:32     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-02 16:02 ` [PATCH 14/14] mm,migration: Allow the migration of PageSwapCache pages Mel Gorman
2010-04-06  6:54   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-06 15:37   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-07  0:06   ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-07 16:49     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-06 14:47 ` [PATCH 0/14] Memory Compaction v7 Tarkan Erimer
2010-04-06 15:00   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-06 15:03     ` Tarkan Erimer
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-30  9:14 [PATCH 0/14] Memory Compaction v6 Mel Gorman
2010-03-30  9:14 ` [PATCH 12/14] Add a tunable that decides when memory should be compacted and when it should be reclaimed 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=20100407161143.GU17882@csn.ul.ie \
    --to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --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 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).