On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:49:03 +0100
Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:09:20AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:47:35 +0100
> > Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Commit [aa45484: calculate a better estimate of NR_FREE_PAGES when
> > > memory is low] noted that watermarks were based on the vmstat
> > > NR_FREE_PAGES. To avoid synchronization overhead, these counters are
> > > maintained on a per-cpu basis and drained both periodically and when a
> > > threshold is above a threshold. On large CPU systems, the difference
> > > between the estimate and real value of NR_FREE_PAGES can be very high.
> > > The system can get into a case where pages are allocated far below the
> > > min watermark potentially causing livelock issues. The commit solved the
> > > problem by taking a better reading of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory was low.
> > >
> > > <SNIP>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/vmstat.c b/mm/vmstat.c
> > > index 355a9e6..cafcc2d 100644
> > > --- a/mm/vmstat.c
> > > +++ b/mm/vmstat.c
> > > @@ -81,6 +81,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(vm_stat);
> > >
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > >
> > > +static int calculate_pressure_threshold(struct zone *zone)
> > > +{
> > > + return max(1, (int)((high_wmark_pages(zone) - low_wmark_pages(zone) /
> > > + num_online_cpus())));
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > Could you add background theory of this calculation as a comment to
> > show the difference with calculate_threshold() ?
> >
>
> Sure. When writing it, I realised that the calculations here differ from
> what percpu_drift_mark does. This is what I currently have
>
> int calculate_pressure_threshold(struct zone *zone)
> {
> int threshold;
> int watermark_distance;
>
> /*
> * As vmstats are not up to date, there is drift between the estimated
> * and real values. For high thresholds and a high number of CPUs, it
> * is possible for the min watermark to be breached while the estimated
> * value looks fine. The pressure threshold is a reduced value such
> * that even the maximum amount of drift will not accidentally breach
> * the min watermark
> */
> watermark_distance = low_wmark_pages(zone) - min_wmark_pages(zone);
> threshold = max(1, watermark_distance / num_online_cpus());
>
> /*
> * Maximum threshold is 125
> */
> threshold = min(125, threshold);
>
> return threshold;
> }
>
> Is this better?
>
sounds nice.
Regards,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>