linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
	David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Damien Ramonda <damien.ramonda@intel.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Linus <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V5] mm readahead: Fix readahead fail for no local memory and limit readahead pages
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 13:51:42 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52F88C16.70204@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402071239301.4212@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On 02/08/2014 02:11 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>> 3) Change the "readahead into remote memory" part of the documentation
>> which is misleading.
>>
>> ( I feel no need to add numa_mem_id() since we would specifically limit
>> the readahead with MAX_REMOTE_READAHEAD in memoryless cpu cases).
>>
>
> I don't understand what you're saying, numa_mem_id() is local memory to
> current's cpu.  When a node consists only of cpus and not memory it is not
> true that all memory is then considered remote, you won't find that in any
> specification that defines memory affinity including the ACPI spec.  I can
> trivially define all cpus on my system to be on memoryless nodes and
> having that affect readahead behavior when, in fact, there is affinity
> would be ridiculous.
>
As you rightly pointed , I 'll drop remote memory term and use
something like  :

"* Ensure readahead success on a memoryless node cpu. But we limit
  * the readahead to 4k pages to avoid trashing page cache." ..

Regarding ACCESS_ONCE, since we will have to add
inside the function and still there is nothing that could prevent us
getting run on different cpu with a different node (as Andrew ponted), I 
have not included in current patch that I am posting.
Moreover this case is hopefully not fatal since it is just a hint for 
readahead we can do.

So there are many possible implementation:
(1) use numa_mem_id(), apply freepage limit  and use 4k page limit for 
all case
(Jan had reservation about this case)

(2)for normal case:    use free memory calculation and do not apply 4k
     limit (no change).
    for memoryless cpu case:  use numa_mem_id for more accurate
     calculation of limit and also apply 4k limit.

(3) for normal case:   use free memory calculation and do not apply 4k
     limit (no change).
     for memoryless case: apply 4k page limit

(4) use numa_mem_id() and apply only free page limit..

So, I ll be resending the patch with changelog and comment changes
based on your and Andrew's feedback (type (3) implementation).




--
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:[~2014-02-10  8:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-22 10:53 [RFC PATCH V5] mm readahead: Fix readahead fail for no local memory and limit readahead pages Raghavendra K T
2014-02-03  8:30 ` Raghavendra K T
2014-02-06 22:51 ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-06 22:58   ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 23:22     ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-06 23:48       ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 23:58         ` David Rientjes
2014-02-07 10:42           ` Raghavendra K T
2014-02-07 20:41             ` David Rientjes
2014-02-10  8:21               ` Raghavendra K T [this message]
2014-02-10 10:05                 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-10 12:25                   ` Raghavendra K T
2014-02-10 21:35                     ` David Rientjes
2014-02-13  7:07                       ` Raghavendra K T
2014-02-13  8:05                         ` David Rientjes
2014-02-13 10:04                           ` Raghavendra K T
2014-02-13 22:41                             ` David Rientjes
2014-02-14  0:14                               ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-14  0:37                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-02-14  0:45                                   ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-14  4:32                                   ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-14 10:54                                     ` David Rientjes
2014-02-17 19:28                                       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-17 23:14                                         ` David Rientjes
2014-02-18  1:31                                           ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-17 22:59                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-02-14  7:43                                   ` Jan Kara
2014-02-17 22:57                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-02-14  5:47                               ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-13 21:06                           ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-13 21:42                             ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-10  8:29   ` [RFC PATCH V5 RESEND] " Raghavendra K T

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=52F88C16.70204@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=damien.ramonda@intel.com \
    --cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).