linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Pintu Kumar <pintu.k@samsung.com>,
	Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>, Gioh Kim <gioh.kim@lge.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] mm, page_alloc: Reserve pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations on demand
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:35:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55B8BA75.9090903@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437379219-9160-10-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.com>

On 07/20/2015 10:00 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> 
> High-order watermark checking exists for two reasons --  kswapd high-order
> awareness and protection for high-order atomic requests. Historically we
> depended on MIGRATE_RESERVE to preserve min_free_kbytes as high-order free
> pages for as long as possible. This patch introduces MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC
> that reserves pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations. This is expected
> to be more reliable than MIGRATE_RESERVE was.
> 
> A MIGRATE_HIGHORDER pageblock is created when an allocation request steals
> a pageblock but limits the total number to 10% of the zone.

This looked weird, until I read the implementation and realized that "an
allocation request" is limited to high-order atomic allocation requests.

> The pageblocks are unreserved if an allocation fails after a direct
> reclaim attempt.
> 
> The watermark checks account for the reserved pageblocks when the allocation
> request is not a high-order atomic allocation.
> 
> The stutter benchmark was used to evaluate this but while it was running
> there was a systemtap script that randomly allocated between 1 and 1G worth
> of order-3 pages using GFP_ATOMIC. In kernel 4.2-rc1 running this workload
> on a single-node machine there were 339574 allocation failures. With this
> patch applied there were 28798 failures -- a 92% reduction. On a 4-node
> machine, allocation failures went from 76917 to 0 failures.
> 
> There are minor theoritical side-effects. If the system is intensively
> making large numbers of long-lived high-order atomic allocations then
> there will be a lot of reserved pageblocks. This may push some workloads
> into reclaim until the number of reserved pageblocks is reduced again. This
> problem was not observed in reclaim intensive workloads but such workloads
> are also not atomic high-order intensive.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

[...]

> +/*
> + * Used when an allocation is about to fail under memory pressure. This
> + * potentially hurts the reliability of high-order allocations when under
> + * intense memory pressure but failed atomic allocations should be easier
> + * to recover from than an OOM.
> + */
> +static void unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(const struct alloc_context *ac)
> +{
> +	struct zonelist *zonelist = ac->zonelist;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct zoneref *z;
> +	struct zone *zone;
> +	struct page *page;
> +	int order;
> +
> +	for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist, ac->high_zoneidx,
> +								ac->nodemask) {

This fixed order might bias some zones over others wrt unreserving. Is it OK?

> +		/* Preserve at least one pageblock */
> +		if (zone->nr_reserved_highatomic <= pageblock_nr_pages)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
> +		for (order = 0; order < MAX_ORDER; order++) {

Would it make more sense to look in descending order for a higher chance of
unreserving a pageblock that's mostly free? Like the traditional page stealing does?

> +			struct free_area *area = &(zone->free_area[order]);
> +
> +			if (list_empty(&area->free_list[MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC]))
> +				continue;
> +
> +			page = list_entry(area->free_list[MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC].next,
> +						struct page, lru);
> +
> +			zone->nr_reserved_highatomic -= pageblock_nr_pages;
> +			set_pageblock_migratetype(page, ac->migratetype);

Would it make more sense to assume MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE, as high-order allocations
present in the pageblock typically would be, and apply the traditional page
stealing heuristics to decide if it should be changed to ac->migratetype (if
that differs)?

> +			move_freepages_block(zone, page, ac->migratetype);
> +			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  /* Remove an element from the buddy allocator from the fallback list */
>  static inline struct page *
>  __rmqueue_fallback(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order, int start_migratetype)
> @@ -1619,15 +1689,26 @@ __rmqueue_fallback(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order, int start_migratetype)
>  	return NULL;
>  }
>  
> +static inline bool gfp_mask_atomic(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +{
> +	return !(gfp_mask & (__GFP_WAIT | __GFP_NO_KSWAPD));
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * Do the hard work of removing an element from the buddy allocator.
>   * Call me with the zone->lock already held.
>   */
>  static struct page *__rmqueue(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order,
> -						int migratetype)
> +				int migratetype, gfp_t gfp_flags)
>  {
>  	struct page *page;
>  
> +	if (unlikely(order && gfp_mask_atomic(gfp_flags))) {
> +		page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
> +		if (page)
> +			goto out;
> +	}
> +
>  	page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, migratetype);
>  	if (unlikely(!page)) {
>  		if (migratetype == MIGRATE_MOVABLE)
> @@ -1637,6 +1718,7 @@ static struct page *__rmqueue(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order,
>  			page = __rmqueue_fallback(zone, order, migratetype);
>  	}
>  
> +out:
>  	trace_mm_page_alloc_zone_locked(page, order, migratetype);
>  	return page;
>  }
> @@ -1654,7 +1736,7 @@ static int rmqueue_bulk(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order,
>  
>  	spin_lock(&zone->lock);
>  	for (i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
> -		struct page *page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype);
> +		struct page *page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype, 0);
>  		if (unlikely(page == NULL))
>  			break;
>  
> @@ -2065,7 +2147,7 @@ struct page *buffered_rmqueue(struct zone *preferred_zone,
>  			WARN_ON_ONCE(order > 1);
>  		}
>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
> -		page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype);
> +		page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype, gfp_flags);
>  		spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
>  		if (!page)
>  			goto failed;
> @@ -2175,15 +2257,23 @@ static bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
>  			unsigned long mark, int classzone_idx, int alloc_flags,
>  			long free_pages)
>  {
> -	/* free_pages may go negative - that's OK */
>  	long min = mark;
>  	int o;
>  	long free_cma = 0;
>  
> +	/* free_pages may go negative - that's OK */
>  	free_pages -= (1 << order) - 1;
> +
>  	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGH)
>  		min -= min / 2;
> -	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the caller is not atomic then discount the reserves. This will
> +	 * over-estimate how the atomic reserve but it avoids a search
> +	 */
> +	if (likely(!(alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)))
> +		free_pages -= z->nr_reserved_highatomic;

Hm, so in the case the maximum of 10% reserved blocks is already full, we deny
the allocation access to another 10% of the memory and push it to reclaim. This
seems rather excessive.
Searching would of course suck, as would attempting to replicate the handling of
NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES. Sigh.

> +	else
>  		min -= min / 4;
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_CMA
> @@ -2372,6 +2462,14 @@ try_this_zone:
>  		if (page) {
>  			if (prep_new_page(page, order, gfp_mask, alloc_flags))
>  				goto try_this_zone;
> +
> +			/*
> +			 * If this is a high-order atomic allocation then check
> +			 * if the pageblock should be reserved for the future
> +			 */
> +			if (unlikely(order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)))
> +				reserve_highatomic_pageblock(page, zone, order);
> +
>  			return page;
>  		}
>  	}
> @@ -2639,9 +2737,11 @@ retry:
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * If an allocation failed after direct reclaim, it could be because
> -	 * pages are pinned on the per-cpu lists. Drain them and try again
> +	 * pages are pinned on the per-cpu lists or in high alloc reserves.
> +	 * Shrink them them and try again
>  	 */
>  	if (!page && !drained) {
> +		unreserve_highatomic_pageblock(ac);
>  		drain_all_pages(NULL);
>  		drained = true;
>  		goto retry;
> @@ -2686,7 +2786,7 @@ static inline int
>  gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
>  {
>  	int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_MIN | ALLOC_CPUSET;
> -	const bool atomic = !(gfp_mask & (__GFP_WAIT | __GFP_NO_KSWAPD));
> +	const bool atomic = gfp_mask_atomic(gfp_mask);
>  
>  	/* __GFP_HIGH is assumed to be the same as ALLOC_HIGH to save a branch. */
>  	BUILD_BUG_ON(__GFP_HIGH != (__force gfp_t) ALLOC_HIGH);
> diff --git a/mm/vmstat.c b/mm/vmstat.c
> index 49963aa2dff3..3427a155f85e 100644
> --- a/mm/vmstat.c
> +++ b/mm/vmstat.c
> @@ -901,6 +901,7 @@ static char * const migratetype_names[MIGRATE_TYPES] = {
>  	"Unmovable",
>  	"Reclaimable",
>  	"Movable",
> +	"HighAtomic",
>  #ifdef CONFIG_CMA
>  	"CMA",
>  #endif
> 

--
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:[~2015-07-29 11:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-20  8:00 [RFC PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 01/10] mm, page_alloc: Delete the zonelist_cache Mel Gorman
2015-07-21 23:47   ` David Rientjes
2015-07-23 10:58     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 02/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary parameter from zone_watermark_ok_safe Mel Gorman
2015-07-21 23:49   ` David Rientjes
2015-07-28 12:20   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 03/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary recalculations for dirty zone balancing Mel Gorman
2015-07-22  0:08   ` David Rientjes
2015-07-23 12:28     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 12:25   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 04/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary taking of a seqlock when cpusets are disabled Mel Gorman
2015-07-22  0:11   ` David Rientjes
2015-07-28 12:32   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 05/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary updating of GFP flags during normal operation Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 13:36   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-28 13:47     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-28 15:48     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 06/10] mm, page_alloc: Use jump label to check if page grouping by mobility is enabled Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 13:42   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 07/10] mm, page_alloc: Use masks and shifts when converting GFP flags to migrate types Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 08/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove MIGRATE_RESERVE Mel Gorman
2015-07-29  9:59   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-29 12:25     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm, page_alloc: Reserve pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations on demand Mel Gorman
2015-07-29 11:35   ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2015-07-29 12:53     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  8:28       ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31  8:43         ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  5:54   ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  7:11     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  7:25       ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31  8:22         ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  8:30         ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  8:26       ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  8:41         ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20  8:00 ` [PATCH 10/10] mm, page_alloc: Only enforce watermarks for order-0 allocations Mel Gorman
2015-07-29 12:25   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-29 13:04     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  6:08   ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  7:19     ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31  8:40       ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  6:14 ` [RFC PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31  7:20   ` Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-08-12 10:45 [PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking v2 Mel Gorman
2015-08-12 10:45 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm, page_alloc: Reserve pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations on demand Mel Gorman
2015-09-21 10:52 [PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking v4 Mel Gorman
2015-09-21 10:52 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm, page_alloc: Reserve pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations on demand Mel Gorman
2015-09-24 13:50   ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-25 19:22   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-09-29 21:01   ` Andrew Morton
2015-09-30  8:27     ` Mel Gorman
2015-09-30 14:02       ` Vlastimil Babka

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=55B8BA75.9090903@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=gioh.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.com \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=pintu.k@samsung.com \
    --cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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).