From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 3/5] mm/rmqueue_bulk: alloc without touching individual page structure
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:20:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181018112055.GN5819@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181017142327.GB9167@intel.com>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:23:27PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > RT has had problems with cpu_relax in the past but more importantly, as
> > this delay for parallel compactions and allocations of contig ranges,
> > we could be stuck here for very long periods of time with interrupts
>
> The longest possible time is one CPU accessing pcp->batch number cold
> cachelines. Reason:
> When zone_wait_cluster_alloc() is called, we already held zone lock so
> no more allocations are possible. Waiting in_progress to become zero
> means waiting any CPU that increased in_progress to finish processing
> their allocated pages. Since they will at most allocate pcp->batch pages
> and worse case are all these page structres are cache cold, so the
> longest wait time is one CPU accessing pcp->batch number cold cache lines.
>
> I have no idea if this time is too long though.
>
But compact_zone calls zone_wait_and_disable_cluster_alloc so how is the
disabled time there bound by pcp->batch?
> > disabled. It gets even worse if it's from an interrupt context such as
> > jumbo frame allocation or a high-order slab allocation that is atomic.
>
> My understanding is atomic allocation won't trigger compaction, no?
>
No, they can't. I didn't check properly but be wary of any possibility
whereby interrupts can get delayed in zone_wait_cluster_alloc. I didn't
go back and check if it can -- partially because I'm more focused on the
lazy buddy aspect at the moment.
> > It may be necessary to consider instead minimising the number
> > of struct page update when merging to PCP and then either increasing the
> > size of the PCP or allowing it to exceed pcp->high for short periods of
> > time to batch the struct page updates.
>
> I don't quite follow this part. It doesn't seem possible we can exceed
> pcp->high in allocation path, or are you talking about free path?
>
I'm talking about the free path.
> And thanks a lot for the review!
My pleasure, hope it helps.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-18 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-17 6:33 [RFC v4 PATCH 0/5] Eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page_fault1 and parallel free Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 6:33 ` [RFC v4 PATCH 1/5] mm/page_alloc: use helper functions to add/remove a page to/from buddy Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-17 6:33 ` [RFC v4 PATCH 2/5] mm/__free_one_page: skip merge for order-0 page unless compaction failed Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 10:44 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-17 13:10 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 13:58 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-17 14:59 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-18 11:16 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-19 5:57 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-19 8:54 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-19 15:00 ` Daniel Jordan
2018-10-20 9:00 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 17:03 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-18 6:48 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-18 8:23 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-18 11:07 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 6:33 ` [RFC v4 PATCH 3/5] mm/rmqueue_bulk: alloc without touching individual page structure Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 11:20 ` Mel Gorman
2018-10-17 14:23 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-18 11:20 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2018-10-18 13:21 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-22 9:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-10-23 2:19 ` Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 6:33 ` [RFC v4 PATCH 4/5] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: reduce overhead of cluster operation on free path Aaron Lu
2018-10-17 6:33 ` [RFC v4 PATCH 5/5] mm/can_skip_merge(): make it more aggressive to attempt cluster alloc/free Aaron Lu
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=20181018112055.GN5819@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tariqt@mellanox.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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).