Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 17:05:46 +0900
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
Cc: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@xiaomi.com>, rjw@rjwysocki.net, len.brown@intel.com,
        pavel@ucw.cz, m.szyprowski@samsung.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, mina86@mina86.com,
        aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, mgorman@suse.de, minchan@kernel.org,
        nasa4836@gmail.com, ddstreet@ieee.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        mingo@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, keescook@chromium.org,
        atomlin@redhat.com, raistlin@linux.it, axboe@fb.com,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com,
        k.khlebnikov@samsung.com, msalter@redhat.com, deller@gmx.de,
        tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com, ben@decadent.org.uk, akinobu.mita@gmail.com,
        lauraa@codeaurora.org, vbabka@suse.cz, sasha.levin@oracle.com,
        vdavydov@parallels.com, suleiman@google.com,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] (CMA_AGGRESSIVE) Make CMA memory be more aggressive
 about allocation
Message-ID: <20141103080546.GB7052@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
References: <1413430551-22392-1-git-send-email-zhuhui@xiaomi.com>
 <20141024052553.GE15243@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <CANFwon1JUmxP5S_jrEg=k7VRBhrD9DC0cH3ve4FioSVRYK0n4A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANFwon1JUmxP5S_jrEg=k7VRBhrD9DC0cH3ve4FioSVRYK0n4A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:28:38PM +0800, Hui Zhu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:35:47AM +0800, Hui Zhu wrote:
> >> In fallbacks of page_alloc.c, MIGRATE_CMA is the fallback of
> >> MIGRATE_MOVABLE.
> >> MIGRATE_MOVABLE will use MIGRATE_CMA when it doesn't have a page in
> >> order that Linux kernel want.
> >>
> >> If a system that has a lot of user space program is running, for
> >> instance, an Android board, most of memory is in MIGRATE_MOVABLE and
> >> allocated.  Before function __rmqueue_fallback get memory from
> >> MIGRATE_CMA, the oom_killer will kill a task to release memory when
> >> kernel want get MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE memory because fallbacks of
> >> MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE are MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE and MIGRATE_MOVABLE.
> >> This status is odd.  The MIGRATE_CMA has a lot free memory but Linux
> >> kernel kill some tasks to release memory.
> >>
> >> This patch series adds a new function CMA_AGGRESSIVE to make CMA memory
> >> be more aggressive about allocation.
> >> If function CMA_AGGRESSIVE is available, when Linux kernel call function
> >> __rmqueue try to get pages from MIGRATE_MOVABLE and conditions allow,
> >> MIGRATE_CMA will be allocated as MIGRATE_MOVABLE first.  If MIGRATE_CMA
> >> doesn't have enough pages for allocation, go back to allocate memory from
> >> MIGRATE_MOVABLE.
> >> Then the memory of MIGRATE_MOVABLE can be kept for MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE and
> >> MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE which doesn't have fallback MIGRATE_CMA.
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I did some work similar to this.
> > Please reference following links.
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/64
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/57
> 
> > I tested #1 approach and found the problem. Although free memory on
> > meminfo can move around low watermark, there is large fluctuation on free
> > memory, because too many pages are reclaimed when kswapd is invoked.
> > Reason for this behaviour is that successive allocated CMA pages are
> > on the LRU list in that order and kswapd reclaim them in same order.
> > These memory doesn't help watermark checking from kwapd, so too many
> > pages are reclaimed, I guess.
> 
> This issue can be handle with some change around shrink code.  I am
> trying to integrate  a patch for them.
> But I am not sure we met the same issue.  Do you mind give me more
> info about this part?

I forgot the issue because there is so big time-gap. I need sometime
to bring issue back to my brain. I will answer it soon after some thinking.

> 
> >
> > And, aggressive allocation should be postponed until freepage counting
> > bug is fixed, because aggressive allocation enlarge the possiblity
> > of problem occurence. I tried to fix that bug, too. See following link.
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/23/90
> 
> I am following these patches.  They are great!  Thanks for your work.

Thanks. :)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/