From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 066E36B01EE for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 02:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so123813fgb.8 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:18:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100412060931.GP5683@laptop> References: <20100410184750.GJ5708@random.random> <20100410190233.GA30882@elte.hu> <4BC0CFF4.5000207@redhat.com> <20100410194751.GA23751@elte.hu> <4BC0DE84.3090305@redhat.com> <20100411104608.GA12828@elte.hu> <4BC1B2CA.8050208@redhat.com> <20100411120800.GC10952@elte.hu> <20100412060931.GP5683@laptop> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:18:56 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00 of 41] Transparent Hugepage Support #17 From: Pekka Enberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Ingo Molnar , Avi Kivity , Mike Galbraith , Jason Garrett-Glaser , Andrea Arcangeli , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Marcelo Tosatti , Adam Litke , Izik Eidus , Hugh Dickins , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Dave Hansen , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Mike Travis , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Christoph Lameter , Chris Wright , bpicco@redhat.com, KOSAKI Motohiro , Balbir Singh , Arnd Bergmann , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Peter Zijlstra , Johannes Weiner , Daisuke Nishimura List-ID: On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: >> I think Andrea and Mel and you demonstrated that while defrag is futile in >> theory (we can always fill up all of RAM with dentries and there's no 2MB >> allocation possible), it seems rather usable in practice. > > One problem is that you need to keep a lot more memory free in order > for it to be reasonably effective. Another thing is that the problem > of fragmentation breakdown is not just a one-shot event that fills > memory with pinned objects. It is a slow degredation. > > Especially when you use something like SLUB as the memory allocator > which requires higher order allocations for objects which are pinned > in kernel memory. I guess we'd need to merge the SLUB defragmentation patches to fix that? -- 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: email@kvack.org