From: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: a question about high-order check in __zone_watermark_ok()
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:16:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57E8E786.8030703@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160926085850.GB28550@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2016/9/26 16:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 26-09-16 16:47:57, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> commit 97a16fc82a7c5b0cfce95c05dfb9561e306ca1b1
>> (mm, page_alloc: only enforce watermarks for order-0 allocations)
>> rewrite the high-order check in __zone_watermark_ok(), but I think it
>> quietly fix a bug. Please see the following.
>>
>> Before this patch, the high-order check is this:
>> __zone_watermark_ok()
>> ...
>> for (o = 0; o < order; o++) {
>> /* At the next order, this order's pages become unavailable */
>> free_pages -= z->free_area[o].nr_free << o;
>>
>> /* Require fewer higher order pages to be free */
>> min >>= 1;
>>
>> if (free_pages <= min)
>> return false;
>> }
>> ...
>>
>> If we have cma memory, and we alloc a high-order movable page, then it's right.
>>
>> But if we alloc a high-order unmovable page(e.g. alloc kernel stack in dup_task_struct()),
>> and there are a lot of high-order cma pages, but little high-order unmovable
>> pages, the it is still return *true*, but we will alloc *failed* finally, because
>> we cannot fallback from migrate_unmovable to migrate_cma, right?
>
> AFAIR CMA wmark check was always tricky and the above commit has made
> the situation at least a bit more clear. Anyway IIRC
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CMA
> /* If allocation can't use CMA areas don't use free CMA pages */
> if (!(alloc_flags & ALLOC_CMA))
> free_cma = zone_page_state(z, NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES);
> #endif
>
> if (free_pages - free_cma <= min + z->lowmem_reserve[classzone_idx])
> return false;
>
> should reduce the prioblem because a lot of CMA pages should just get us
> below the wmark + reserve boundary.
Hi Michal,
If we have many high-order cma pages, and the left pages (unmovable/movable/reclaimable)
are also enough, but they are fragment, then it will triger the problem.
If we alloc a high-order unmovable page, water mark check return *true*, but we
will alloc *failed*, right?
Thanks,
Xishi Qiu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-26 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-26 8:47 [RFC] mm: a question about high-order check in __zone_watermark_ok() Xishi Qiu
2016-09-26 8:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-09-26 8:58 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-26 9:16 ` Xishi Qiu [this message]
2016-09-26 9:43 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-26 10:17 ` Xishi Qiu
2016-09-26 11:02 ` Michal Hocko
2016-09-28 5:52 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-09-28 7:54 ` Xishi Qiu
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=57E8E786.8030703@huawei.com \
--to=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=xieyisheng1@huawei.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).