From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, anton@samba.org, mgorman@suse.de
Subject: Re: Bug in reclaim logic with exhausted nodes?
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:23:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140325162303.GA29977@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1403251116490.16557@nuc>
On 25.03.2014 [11:17:57 -0500], Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>
> > Anyone have any ideas here?
>
> Dont do that? Check on boot to not allow exhausting a node with huge
> pages?
Gigantic hugepages are allocated by the hypervisor (not the Linux VM),
and we don't control where the allocation occurs. Yes, ideally, they
would be interleaved to avoid this situation, but I can also see reasons
for having them all be from one node so that tasks can be affinitized
and get the guarantee of the 16GB pagesize benefit.
Thanks,
Nish
--
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:[~2014-03-25 16:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-11 21:06 Bug in reclaim logic with exhausted nodes? Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-13 17:01 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-24 23:05 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-25 16:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-03-25 16:23 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2014-03-25 16:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-03-25 18:10 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-25 18:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-03-25 18:37 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-27 20:33 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-29 5:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-04-01 1:33 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-04-03 16:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-12 18:46 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
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=20140325162303.GA29977@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--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).