On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 04:48:43PM -0400, Eric B Munson wrote: > Currently, pages which are marked as unevictable are protected from > compaction, but not from other types of migration. The mlock > desctription does not promise that all page faults will be avoided, only > major ones so this protection is not necessary. This extra protection > can cause problems for applications that are using mlock to avoid > swapping pages out, but require order > 0 allocations to continue to > succeed in a fragmented environment. This patch removes the > ISOLATE_UNEVICTABLE mode and the check for it in __isolate_lru_page(). > Removing this check allows the removal of the isolate_mode argument from > isolate_migratepages_block() because it can compute the required mode > from the compact_control structure. > > To illustrate this problem I wrote a quick test program that mmaps a > large number of 1MB files filled with random data. These maps are > created locked and read only. Then every other mmap is unmapped and I > attempt to allocate huge pages to the static huge page pool. Without > this patch I am unable to allocate any huge pages after fragmenting > memory. With it, I can allocate almost all the space freed by unmapping > as huge pages. So mlock() is part of the POSIX real-time spec. For real-time purposes we very much do _NOT_ want page migration to happen. So while you might be following the letter of the spec you're very much violating the spirit of the thing. Also, there is another solution to your problem; you can compact mlock'ed pages at mlock() time. Furthermore, I would once again like to remind people of my VM_PINNED patches. The only thing that needs happening there is someone needs to deobfuscate the IB code. -- 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>