From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: kswapd: Stop high-order balancing when any suitable zone is balanced
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
        Simon Kirby <sim@hostway.ca>, Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1291171667.12777.51.camel@sli10-conroe>
References: <20101201112354.ABA8.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <1291171667.12777.51.camel@sli10-conroe>
Message-Id: <20101201115401.ABB1.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed,  1 Dec 2010 11:59:12 +0900 (JST)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1807
Lines: 33

> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 10:23 +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 01:15 +0800, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > When the allocator enters its slow path, kswapd is woken up to balance the
> > > > node. It continues working until all zones within the node are balanced. For
> > > > order-0 allocations, this makes perfect sense but for higher orders it can
> > > > have unintended side-effects. If the zone sizes are imbalanced, kswapd
> > > > may reclaim heavily on a smaller zone discarding an excessive number of
> > > > pages. The user-visible behaviour is that kswapd is awake and reclaiming
> > > > even though plenty of pages are free from a suitable zone.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch alters the "balance" logic to stop kswapd if any suitable zone
> > > > becomes balanced to reduce the number of pages it reclaims from other zones.
> > > from my understanding, the patch will break reclaim high zone if a low
> > > zone meets the high order allocation, even the high zone doesn't meet
> > > the high order allocation. This, for example, will make a high order
> > > allocation from a high zone fallback to low zone and quickly exhaust low
> > > zone, for example DMA. This will break some drivers.
> > 
> > Have you seen patch [3/3]? I think it migigate your pointed issue.
> yes, it improves a lot, but still possible for small systems.

Ok, I got you. so please define your "small systems" word? we can't make
perfect VM heuristics obviously, then we need to compare pros/cons.

Of cource, I'm glad if you have better idea and show it.


--
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/