| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20100216084113.GB26086@csn.ul.ie>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:41:14 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] Export fragmentation index via /proc/pagetypeinfo
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 04:59:05PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Fragmentation index is a value that makes sense when an allocation of a
> > given size would fail. The index indicates whether an allocation failure is
> > due to a lack of memory (values towards 0) or due to external fragmentation
> > (value towards 1). For the most part, the huge page size will be the size
> > of interest but not necessarily so it is exported on a per-order and per-zone
> > basis via /proc/pagetypeinfo.
> >
> > The index is normally calculated as a value between 0 and 1 which is
> > obviously unsuitable within the kernel. Instead, the first three decimal
> > places are used as a value between 0 and 1000 for an integer approximation.
>
> Hmmm..
>
> I haven't understand why admin need to know two metrics (unusable-index
> and fragmentation-index). they have very similar meanings and easy confusable
> imho.
>
Because they have different meanings and used for different things. Unusable
index describes the current system state and is the one that is most likely
to be of interest to an administrator monitoring this. Fragmentation index is
telling you "why" an allocation failed because arguably external fragmentation
does not exist until the time of allocation failure.
Fragmentation index is used for example to determine if compaction is
likely to work in advance or not.
> Can we make just one user friendly metrics?
>
What do you suggest?
Unusable free space index is easier to understand and can be expressed
as a percentage but fragmentation index is what the kernel is using. I
could hide the fragmentation index altogether if you prefer? I intend to
use it myself but I can always use a debugging patch.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
> > ---
> > Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt | 11 ++++++
> > mm/vmstat.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> > index 0968a81..06bf53c 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
> > @@ -618,6 +618,10 @@ Unusable free space index at order
> > Node 0, zone DMA 0 0 0 2 6 18 34 67 99 227 485
> > Node 0, zone DMA32 0 0 1 2 4 7 10 17 23 31 34
> >
> > +Fragmentation index at order
> > +Node 0, zone DMA -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
> > +Node 0, zone DMA32 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
> > +
> > Number of blocks type Unmovable Reclaimable Movable Reserve Isolate
> > Node 0, zone DMA 2 0 5 1 0
> > Node 0, zone DMA32 41 6 967 2 0
> > @@ -639,6 +643,13 @@ value between 0 and 1000. The higher the value, the more of free memory is
> > unusable and by implication, the worse the external fragmentation is. The
> > percentage of unusable free memory can be found by dividing this value by 10.
> >
> > +The fragmentation index, is only meaningful if an allocation would fail and
> > +indicates what the failure is due to. A value of -1 such as in the example
> > +states that the allocation would succeed. If it would fail, the value is
> > +between 0 and 1000. A value tending towards 0 implies the allocation failed
> > +due to a lack of memory. A value tending towards 1000 implies it failed
> > +due to external fragmentation.
> > +
> > If min_free_kbytes has been tuned correctly (recommendations made by hugeadm
> > from libhugetlbfs http://sourceforge.net/projects/libhugetlbfs/), one can
> > make an estimate of the likely number of huge pages that can be allocated
> > diff --git a/mm/vmstat.c b/mm/vmstat.c
> > index d05d610..e2d0cc1 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmstat.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmstat.c
> > @@ -494,6 +494,35 @@ static void fill_contig_page_info(struct zone *zone,
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > + * A fragmentation index only makes sense if an allocation of a requested
> > + * size would fail. If that is true, the fragmentation index indicates
> > + * whether external fragmentation or a lack of memory was the problem.
> > + * The value can be used to determine if page reclaim or compaction
> > + * should be used
> > + */
> > +int fragmentation_index(struct zone *zone,
> > + unsigned int order,
> > + struct contig_page_info *info)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long requested = 1UL << order;
> > +
> > + if (!info->free_blocks_total)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + /* Fragmentation index only makes sense when a request would fail */
> > + if (info->free_blocks_suitable)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Index is between 0 and 1 so return within 3 decimal places
> > + *
> > + * 0 => allocation would fail due to lack of memory
> > + * 1 => allocation would fail due to fragmentation
> > + */
> > + return 1000 - ( (1000+(info->free_pages * 1000 / requested)) / info->free_blocks_total);
> > +}
>
> Dumb question. I haven't understand why this calculation represent
> fragmentation index. Do this have theorical background? if yes, can you
> please tell me the pointer?
>
Yes, there is a theoritical background. It's mostly described in
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1375634.1375641
I have a more updated version but it's not published unfortunately.
>
>
>
> > +
> > +/*
> > * Return an index indicating how much of the available free memory is
> > * unusable for an allocation of the requested size.
> > */
> > @@ -516,6 +545,39 @@ static int unusable_free_index(struct zone *zone,
> >
> > }
> >
> > +static void pagetypeinfo_showfragmentation_print(struct seq_file *m,
> > + pg_data_t *pgdat, struct zone *zone)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int order;
> > +
> > + /* Alloc on stack as interrupts are disabled for zone walk */
> > + struct contig_page_info info;
> > +
> > + seq_printf(m, "Node %4d, zone %8s %19s",
> > + pgdat->node_id,
> > + zone->name, " ");
> > + for (order = 0; order < MAX_ORDER; ++order) {
> > + fill_contig_page_info(zone, order, &info);
> > + seq_printf(m, "%6d ", fragmentation_index(zone, order, &info));
> > + }
> > +
> > + seq_putc(m, '\n');
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Display fragmentation index for orders that allocations would fail for
> > + * XXX: Could be a lot more efficient, but it's not a critical path
> > + */
> > +static int pagetypeinfo_showfragmentation(struct seq_file *m, void *arg)
> > +{
> > + pg_data_t *pgdat = (pg_data_t *)arg;
> > +
> > + seq_printf(m, "\nFragmentation index at order\n");
> > + walk_zones_in_node(m, pgdat, pagetypeinfo_showfragmentation_print);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void pagetypeinfo_showunusable_print(struct seq_file *m,
> > pg_data_t *pgdat, struct zone *zone)
> > {
> > @@ -657,6 +719,7 @@ static int pagetypeinfo_show(struct seq_file *m, void *arg)
> > seq_putc(m, '\n');
> > pagetypeinfo_showfree(m, pgdat);
> > pagetypeinfo_showunusable(m, pgdat);
> > + pagetypeinfo_showfragmentation(m, pgdat);
> > pagetypeinfo_showblockcount(m, pgdat);
> >
> > return 0;
> > --
> > 1.6.5
> >
>
>
>
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists