[LSF/MM ATTEND] Improving CMA

[LSF/MM ATTEND] Improving CMA

[Hui Zhu]

Sorry for late.

I would like to attend LSF/MM this year; and most of all would like to
join Laura Abbott in his discussion of improving CMA.

I joined the develop works of CMA is not a long time after I joined the MI.
But to make it work good for our device.  I wrote a patch series to
improving CMA in https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623.
I also used the patch series of Joonsoo in
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64.  And I wrote some patches around
it:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/25/47
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/1/18/28
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/1/18/33

Thanks,
Hui

--
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>

[LSF/MM TOPIC] Improving CMA

[Laura Abbott]

There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various
aspects of CMA. A sampling:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549

As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but
none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of
this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest
problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them.

Thanks,
Laura

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

--
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>

Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Improving CMA

[Joonsoo Kim]

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:54:14PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
> There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various
> aspects of CMA. A sampling:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549
> 
> As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but
> none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of
> this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest
> problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them.

I also tried to solve problem from CMA, that is, reserved memory
utilization.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64

While playing that patchset, I found serious problem about free page
counting, so I stopped to develop it for a while and tried to fix it.
Now, it is fixed by me and I can continue my patchset.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/69

I heard that Minchan suggests new CMA zone like movable zone, and, I
think that it would be the way to go. But, it would be a long-term goal
and I'd like to solve utilization problem with my patchset for now.
It is the biggest issue and it already forces someone to develop
out of tree solution. It's not good that out of tree solution is used
more and more in the product so I'd like to fix it quickly at first
stage.

I think that CMA have big potential. If we fix problems of CMA
completely, it can be used for many places. One such case in my mind
is hugetlb or THP. Until now, hugetlb uses reserved approach, that is
very inefficient. System administrator carefully set the number of
reserved hugepage according to whole system workload. And application
can't use it freely, because it is very limited and managed resource.
If we use CMA for hugetlb, we can easily allocate hugepage and
application can use hugepages more freely.

Anyway, I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic.

Thanks.

--
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>

Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Improving CMA

[Gioh Kim]

2014-11-27 i??i?? 3:12i?? Joonsoo Kim i?'(e??) i?' e,?:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:54:14PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various
>> aspects of CMA. A sampling:
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549
>>
>> As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but
>> none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of
>> this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest
>> problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them.
>
> I also tried to solve problem from CMA, that is, reserved memory
> utilization.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64
>
> While playing that patchset, I found serious problem about free page
> counting, so I stopped to develop it for a while and tried to fix it.
> Now, it is fixed by me and I can continue my patchset.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/69
>
> I heard that Minchan suggests new CMA zone like movable zone, and, I
> think that it would be the way to go. But, it would be a long-term goal
> and I'd like to solve utilization problem with my patchset for now.
> It is the biggest issue and it already forces someone to develop
> out of tree solution. It's not good that out of tree solution is used
> more and more in the product so I'd like to fix it quickly at first
> stage.
>
> I think that CMA have big potential. If we fix problems of CMA
> completely, it can be used for many places. One such case in my mind
> is hugetlb or THP. Until now, hugetlb uses reserved approach, that is
> very inefficient. System administrator carefully set the number of
> reserved hugepage according to whole system workload. And application
> can't use it freely, because it is very limited and managed resource.
> If we use CMA for hugetlb, we can easily allocate hugepage and
> application can use hugepages more freely.
>
> Anyway, I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic.
>
> Thanks.
>

Until now, I've used CMA with 2 out-of-tree patches:
1. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/31/313 : Laura's patch
2. https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64 : Joonsoo's patch

And one merged patch by me: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/78

With them, my platform could've worked but it still had free-page-counting problem.

I think if Joonsoo's patch [2] is merged into mainline, CMA can be stable and useful.
Allocation latency Minchan mentioned is not problem for my platform.
CMA allocation is not often and limited to only one drivers.

Allocation guarantee is, I hope, fixed with my patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/78) at least in my platform.
My platform had worked for several hours but it lacks heavy load test.
I have a plan to use CMA for massive product next year.

I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic too.

--
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>

[LSF/MM ATTEND] Improving CMA

[Gioh Kim]

>
>
> 2014-11-27 i??i?? 3:12i?? Joonsoo Kim i?'(e??) i?' e,?:
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:54:14PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>> There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various
>>> aspects of CMA. A sampling:
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but
>>> none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of
>>> this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest
>>> problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them.
>>
>> I also tried to solve problem from CMA, that is, reserved memory
>> utilization.
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64
>>
>> While playing that patchset, I found serious problem about free page
>> counting, so I stopped to develop it for a while and tried to fix it.
>> Now, it is fixed by me and I can continue my patchset.
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/69
>>
>> I heard that Minchan suggests new CMA zone like movable zone, and, I
>> think that it would be the way to go. But, it would be a long-term goal
>> and I'd like to solve utilization problem with my patchset for now.
>> It is the biggest issue and it already forces someone to develop
>> out of tree solution. It's not good that out of tree solution is used
>> more and more in the product so I'd like to fix it quickly at first
>> stage.
>>
>> I think that CMA have big potential. If we fix problems of CMA
>> completely, it can be used for many places. One such case in my mind
>> is hugetlb or THP. Until now, hugetlb uses reserved approach, that is
>> very inefficient. System administrator carefully set the number of
>> reserved hugepage according to whole system workload. And application
>> can't use it freely, because it is very limited and managed resource.
>> If we use CMA for hugetlb, we can easily allocate hugepage and
>> application can use hugepages more freely.
>>
>> Anyway, I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>
> Until now, I've used CMA with 2 out-of-tree patches:
> 1. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/31/313 : Laura's patch
> 2. https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64 : Joonsoo's patch
>
> And one merged patch by me: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/78
>
> With them, my platform could've worked but it still had free-page-counting problem.
>
> I think if Joonsoo's patch [2] is merged into mainline, CMA can be stable and useful.
> Allocation latency Minchan mentioned is not problem for my platform.
> CMA allocation is not often and limited to only one drivers.
>
> Allocation guarantee is, I hope, fixed with my patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/78) at least in my platform.
> My platform had worked for several hours but it lacks heavy load test.
> I have a plan to use CMA for massive product next year.
>
> I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic too.

I'm sending LSF/MM attend request as Joonsoo did.
Thanks.

--
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>

[LSF/MM ATTEND] Improving CMA

[Joonsoo Kim]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:12:04PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:54:14PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
> > There have been a number of patch series posted designed to improve various
> > aspects of CMA. A sampling:
> > 
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/15/623
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141571797202006&w=2
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/26/549
> > 
> > As far as I can tell, these are all trying to fix real problems with CMA but
> > none of them have moved forward very much from what I can tell. The goal of
> > this session would be to come out with an agreement on what are the biggest
> > problems with CMA and the best ways to solve them.
> 
> I also tried to solve problem from CMA, that is, reserved memory
> utilization.
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64
> 
> While playing that patchset, I found serious problem about free page
> counting, so I stopped to develop it for a while and tried to fix it.
> Now, it is fixed by me and I can continue my patchset.
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/31/69
> 
> I heard that Minchan suggests new CMA zone like movable zone, and, I
> think that it would be the way to go. But, it would be a long-term goal
> and I'd like to solve utilization problem with my patchset for now.
> It is the biggest issue and it already forces someone to develop
> out of tree solution. It's not good that out of tree solution is used
> more and more in the product so I'd like to fix it quickly at first
> stage.
> 
> I think that CMA have big potential. If we fix problems of CMA
> completely, it can be used for many places. One such case in my mind
> is hugetlb or THP. Until now, hugetlb uses reserved approach, that is
> very inefficient. System administrator carefully set the number of
> reserved hugepage according to whole system workload. And application
> can't use it freely, because it is very limited and managed resource.
> If we use CMA for hugetlb, we can easily allocate hugepage and
> application can use hugepages more freely.
> 
> Anyway, I'd like to attend LSF/MM and discuss this topic.

I change the subject according to LSF/MM attend request format.
What I can do and why I'd like to attend is explained above.
Sorry for noise.

Thanks.

--
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>