Linux-mm Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Salvatore Dipietro <dipiets@amazon.it>
To: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <abuehaze@amazon.com>, <alisaidi@amazon.com>,
	<blakgeof@amazon.com>, <brauner@kernel.org>,
	<brendan.jackman@linux.dev>, <david@redhat.com>, <dgc@kernel.org>,
	<dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com>, <dipiets@amazon.it>,
	<djwong@kernel.org>, <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, <hch@infradead.org>,
	<hch@lst.de>, <jackmanb@google.com>,
	<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	<mhocko@suse.com>, <ritesh.list@gmail.com>, <rvvandan@amazon.com>,
	<stable@vger.kernel.org>, <surenb@google.com>,
	<vbabka@kernel.org>, <vbabka@suse.cz>, <willy@infradead.org>,
	<ziy@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:46:02 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260910114602.926944-1-dipiets@amazon.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260905174239.99e31515fabe220aa7d8e6fa@linux-foundation.org>


On Sat, 05 Sep 2026 17:42:39 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Is there anything particularly unusual about this test case?

It is a stock pgbench simple-update PostgreSQL workload on a large
instance (96 vCPUs), using standard PostgreSQL settings and with no huge
pages assigned to the database. We deliberately overprovision the
pgbench clients: 1024 clients over 96 threads. That keeps enough writers
in the buffered write path concurrently to hit the costly-order
allocation failure path continuously. The memory fragmentation comes from 
page tables: PostgreSQL spawns a new process per client, and those page
tables consume ~40% of memory, which significantly limits the page cache
and the free memory available.


> > Results (average of 3 runs, TPS):
> >
> >   Config                   Avg TPS      % vs Baseline
> >   baseline (no patch)       59,408       -
> >   With this patch          155,409      +161.6%
>
> Is this back to pre-5d8edfb900d5 performance?

Yes - fully recovered. Here is the summary, same host and workload
throughout, average of 3 runs:

  Config                                        Avg TPS   % vs baseline
  AL2023 stock 6.1 kernel                       136,942            n/a
  v7.3-rc1 baseline (no patch)                   59,408             -
  v7.3-rc1, 5d8edfb900d5 behaviour reverted     151,184        +154.5%
  v7.3-rc1 + v4                                 155,409        +161.6%

The 6.1 row predates 5d8edfb900d5 entirely. A different kernel version,
so not directly comparable, but it shows the performance this workload
used to get on this host.

A literal "git revert 5d8edfb900d5" does not apply to v7.3-rc1 -
iomap_write_iter() has been rewritten since - so the reverted row is a
one-line behavioural revert, forcing the write loop back to copying at
most PAGE_SIZE per iteration:

  -	size_t chunk = mapping_max_folio_size(mapping);
  +	size_t chunk = PAGE_SIZE;

which is what the pre-5d8edfb900d5 loop computed. That makes
iomap_get_folio() pass no order hint, so the path issues only order-0
allocations.


> AI review asked a few serious-looking questions:
> 	https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260904115629.3993331-1-dipiets@amazon.it

Thanks for pointing that out. To address them, we can have something
like the patch below. Performance results are still similar to v4. Happy
to submit a formal v5 patch with it if you would like.

  Config                                        Avg TPS   % vs baseline
  v7.3-rc1 baseline (no patch)                   59,408             -
  v7.3-rc1 + v4                                 155,409        +161.6%
  v7.3-rc1 + proposed patch                     161,994        +172.7%

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 12fac9084c48..be8b0d72a2db 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4784,10 +4784,22 @@ static inline struct page *
 __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 						struct alloc_context *ac)
 {
-	bool can_direct_reclaim = gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
+	const bool costly_order = order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER;
+	/*
+	 * Costly __GFP_NORETRY callers have a cheap fallback to a lower order,
+	 * so don't stall them in direct reclaim or direct compaction.  Exempt
+	 * __GFP_THISNODE (the THP attempt from alloc_pages_mpol() needs direct
+	 * compaction) and __GFP_NOFAIL (must not be made to fail).  Don't
+	 * clear __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM from gfp_mask instead: that would also
+	 * change the alloc_flags derived by alloc_flags_slowpath().
+	 */
+	const bool costly_noretry = costly_order &&
+		(gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY) &&
+		!(gfp_mask & (__GFP_THISNODE | __GFP_NOFAIL));
+	bool can_direct_reclaim = !costly_noretry &&
+		(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM);
 	bool can_compact = can_direct_reclaim && gfp_compaction_allowed(gfp_mask);
 	bool nofail = gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL;
-	const bool costly_order = order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER;
 	struct page *page = NULL;
 	unsigned int alloc_flags;
 	unsigned long did_some_progress;


Thanks,
Salvatore



AMAZON DEVELOPMENT CENTER ITALY SRL, viale Monte Grappa 3/5, 20124 Milano, Italia, Registro delle Imprese di Milano Monza Brianza Lodi REA n. 2504859, Capitale Sociale: 10.000 EUR i.v., Cod. Fisc. e P.IVA 10100050961, Societa con Socio Unico





  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-10 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-04 11:56 [PATCH v4] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations Salvatore Dipietro
2026-09-04 14:11 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-09-04 15:08   ` Zi Yan
2026-09-07  7:30     ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-09-09  2:33       ` Zi Yan
2026-09-09  8:51         ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-09-04 16:10 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-09-06  0:42 ` Andrew Morton
2026-09-06 23:05   ` Dave Chinner
2026-09-10 11:46   ` Salvatore Dipietro [this message]
2026-09-07  5:54 ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20260910114602.926944-1-dipiets@amazon.it \
    --to=dipiets@amazon.it \
    --cc=abuehaze@amazon.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alisaidi@amazon.com \
    --cc=blakgeof@amazon.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=brendan.jackman@linux.dev \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=dgc@kernel.org \
    --cc=dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jackmanb@google.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=rvvandan@amazon.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.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