From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] Support non-lru page migration Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:11:41 -0700 Message-ID: <20160330161141.4332b189e7a4930e117d765b@linux-foundation.org> References: <1459321935-3655-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1459321935-3655-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Minchan Kim Cc: Rik van Riel , YiPing Xu , aquini@redhat.com, rknize@motorola.com, Sergey Senozhatsky , Chan Gyun Jeong , Hugh Dickins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, bfields@fieldses.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Gioh Kim , koct9i@gmail.com, Sangseok Lee , jlayton@poochiereds.net, Joonsoo Kim , Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:11:59 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote: > Recently, I got many reports about perfermance degradation > in embedded system(Android mobile phone, webOS TV and so on) > and failed to fork easily. > > The problem was fragmentation caused by zram and GPU driver > pages. Their pages cannot be migrated so compaction cannot > work well, either so reclaimer ends up shrinking all of working > set pages. It made system very slow and even to fail to fork > easily. > > Other pain point is that they cannot work with CMA. > Most of CMA memory space could be idle(ie, it could be used > for movable pages unless driver is using) but if driver(i.e., > zram) cannot migrate his page, that memory space could be > wasted. In our product which has big CMA memory, it reclaims > zones too exccessively although there are lots of free space > in CMA so system was very slow easily. > > To solve these problem, this patch try to add facility to > migrate non-lru pages via introducing new friend functions > of migratepage in address_space_operation and new page flags. > > (isolate_page, putback_page) > (PG_movable, PG_isolated) > > For details, please read description in > "mm/compaction: support non-lru movable page migration". OK, I grabbed all these. I wonder about testing coverage during the -next period. How many people are likely to exercise these code paths in a serious way before it all hits mainline?