From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@intel.com>,
Haicheng Li <haicheng.li@linux.intel.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:24:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100902092454.GA17971@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100902180343.f4232c6e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu 02-09-10 18:03:43, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:28:29 +0200
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> > On Thu 02-09-10 14:45:00, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > > On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 14:41:38 +0200
> > [...]
> > > > From de85f1aa42115678d3340f0448cd798577036496 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> > > > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:39:16 +0200
> > > > Subject: [PATCH] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code
> > > >
> > > > Currently is_mem_section_removable checks whether each pageblock from
> > > > the given pfn range is of MIGRATE_MOVABLE type or if it is free. If both
> > > > are false then the range is considered non removable.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, offlining code (more specifically
> > > > set_migratetype_isolate) doesn't care whether a page is free and instead
> > > > it just checks the migrate type of the page and whether the page's zone
> > > > is movable.
> > > >
> > > > This can lead into a situation when we can mark a node as not removable
> > > > just because a pageblock is MIGRATE_RESERVE and it is not free.
> > > >
> > > > Let's make a common helper is_page_removable which unifies both tests
> > > > at one place. Also let's check for MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE rather than all
> > > > possible MIGRATEable types.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> > >
> > > Hmm..Why MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE is included ?
> >
> > AFAIU the code, MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE are movable as well (at least that
> > is how I interpret #define GFP_MOVABLE_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIMABLE|__GFP_MOVABLE)).
> > Why should we prevent from memory offlining if we have some reclaimable
> > pages? Or am I totally misinterpreting the meaning of this flag?
> >
>
> RECLAIMABLE cannot be 100% reclaimable.
OK, I see. The name is little bit misleading then. Should we comment
that?
> Then, for memory hotlug,
> I intentionally skips it and check free_area[] and LRU.
>
>
> > >
> > > If MIGRATE_RCLAIMABLE is included, set_migrate_type() should check the
> > > range of pages. Because it makes the pageblock as MIGRAGE_MOVABLE after
> > > failure of memory hotplug.
> > >
> > > Original code checks.
> > >
> > > - the range is MIGRAGE_MOVABLE or
> > > - the range includes only free pages and LRU pages.
> > >
> > > Then, moving them back to MIGRAGE_MOVABLE after failure was correct.
> > > Doesn't this makes changes MIGRATE_RECALIMABLE to be MIGRATE_MOVABLE and
> > > leads us to more fragmentated situation ?
> >
> > Just to be sure that I understand you concern. We are talking about hot
> > remove failure which can lead to higher fragmentation, right?
> >
> right.
>
> > By the higher fragmentation you mean that all movable pageblocks (even
> > reclaimable) gets to MIGRATE_MOVABLE until we get first failure. In the
> > worst case, if we fail near the end of the zone then there is imbalance
> > in MIGRATE_MOVABLE vs. MIGRATE_RECALIMABLE. Is that what you are
> > thinking of? Doesn't this just gets the zone to the state after
> > onlining? Or is the problem if we fail somewhere in the middle?
> >
>
> No. My concern is pageblock type changes before/after memory hotplug failure.
> before isolation: MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE
> after isolation failure : MIGRATE_MOVABLE
Ahh, OK I can see your point now. unset_migratetype_isolate called on
the failure path sets migrate type unconditionally as it cannot know
what was the original migration type.
What about MIGRATE_RESERVE? Is there anything that can make those
allocations fail offlining?
Thanks!
>
> Then, the section which was RECALAIMABLE (but caused memory hotplug failure)
> turns to be MIGRATE_MOVABLE and will continue to cause memory hotplug failure.
> (Because it contains unreclaimable(still-in-use) slab.)
>
> That means memory-hotplug success-rate goes down because of not-important check,
> and (your) customer believe "memory hotplug never works well hahaha."
>
> The old code checks RECLAIMABLE pageblock only contains free pages or LRU pages,
> In that meaning, MIGRATE_MOVABLE check itself should be removed. It's my fault.
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
--
Michal Hocko
L3 team
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic
--
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:[~2010-09-02 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-20 14:14 [PATCH] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code Michal Hocko
2010-08-22 0:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-23 9:22 ` Michal Hocko
2010-08-31 12:30 ` Michal Hocko
2010-08-31 14:19 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-31 14:36 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-08-31 14:59 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-01 1:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-01 12:19 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-01 12:41 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-02 5:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-02 8:28 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-02 9:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-02 9:24 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2010-09-02 11:19 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2010-09-02 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-02 14:19 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2010-09-02 14:39 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-02 15:05 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 3:10 ` [PATCH 0/2 v2] " KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 3:11 ` [PATCH 1/2][BUGFIX] fix next active pageblock calculation KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 3:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 9:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 9:50 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 10:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 11:01 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 11:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code v3 Michal Hocko
2010-09-04 2:55 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-06 9:16 ` Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 9:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] Make is_mem_section_removable more conformable with offlining code Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 9:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 7:54 ` [PATCH 0/2 v2] " Michal Hocko
2010-09-03 7:57 ` [PATCH 3/2][BUGFIX] fix memory isolation notifier return value check KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-03 20:48 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-03 22:05 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
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=20100902092454.GA17971@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=haicheng.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@linux.vnet.ibm.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).