On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > The total number of free pages is still tracked, however, to not make > > zone_watermark_ok() more expensive. Reading /proc/pagetypeinfo, however, > > is faster. > > Yeah I've already seen a case with /proc/pagetypeinfo causing soft > lockups due to high number of iterations... > Thanks for taking a look at the patchset! Wow, I haven't seen /proc/pagetypeinfo soft lockups yet, I thought this was a relatively minor point :) But it looks like we need some improvement in this behavior independent of memory compaction anyway. > > This patch introduces no functional change and increases the amount of > > per-zone metadata at worst by 48 bytes per memory zone (when CONFIG_CMA > > and CONFIG_MEMORY_ISOLATION are enabled). > > Isn't it 48 bytes per zone and order? > Yes, sorry, I'll fix that in v2. I think less than half a kilobyte for each memory zone is satisfactory for extra tracking, compaction improvements, and optimized /proc/pagetypeinfo, though. > > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I'd be for this if there are no performance regressions. It affects hot > paths and increases cache footprint. I think at least some allocator > intensive microbenchmark should be used. > I can easily implement a test to stress movable page allocations from fallback MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE pageblocks and freeing back to the same pageblocks. I assume we're not interested in memory offline benchmarks. What do you think about the logic presented in patch 2/2? Are you comfortable with a hard-coded ratio such as 1/64th of free memory or would you prefer to look at the zone's watermark with the number of free pages from MIGRATE_MOVABLE pageblocks rather than NR_FREE_PAGES? I was split between the two options. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>