On 15.03.21 17:09, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 15-03-21 16:46:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 13.03.21 09:31, zhou wrote:
[...]
This optimization can avoid ~3% unnecessary isolations from cma
(cma isolated / total isolated) with configuration of total 100Mb
cma pages.
Can you say a few words about interaction with ZONE_MOVABLE, which behaves
similar to CMA? I.e., does the same apply to ZONE_MOVABLE? Is it already
handled?
No, the movable zone shouldn't be affected as the reclaim is zone aware.
The problem is that CMA doesn't belong to any particular zone. This is
something Joonsoo worked in the past and I believe following up on that
work has been recommended last time a similar/same approach like this
patch was proposed.
Okay, thanks - that's what I expected.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
