On Tue 04-07-17 16:04:52, zhouxianrong wrote: > every 2s i sample /proc/buddyinfo in the whole test process. > > the last about 90 samples were sampled after the test was done. I've tried to explain to you that numbers without a proper testing metodology and highlevel metrics you are interested in and comparision to the base kernel are meaningless. I cannot draw any conclusion from looking at numbers you have posted. Are high order allocations cheaper to do with this patch? What about an averge order-0 allocation request? You are touching memory allocator hot paths and those are really sensitive to changes. It takes a lot of testing with different workloads to prove that no new regressions are introduced. That being said, I completely agree that reducing the memory fragmentation is an important objective but touching the page allocator and adding new branches there sounds like a problematic approach which would have to show _huge_ benefits to be mergeable. Is it possible to improve khugepaged to accomplish the same thing? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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>
