linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under load V3

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:51:41 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Jim Schutt <jaschut@...dia.gov>
Cc:	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Improve hugepage allocation success rates under
 load V3

On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 08:36:12AM -0600, Jim Schutt wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> On 08/09/2012 07:49 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >Changelog since V2
> >o Capture !MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages where possible
> >o Document the treatment of MIGRATE_MOVABLE pages while capturing
> >o Expand changelogs
> >
> >Changelog since V1
> >o Dropped kswapd related patch, basically a no-op and regresses if fixed (minchan)
> >o Expanded changelogs a little
> >
> >Allocation success rates have been far lower since 3.4 due to commit
> >[fe2c2a10: vmscan: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled]. This
> >commit was introduced for good reasons and it was known in advance that
> >the success rates would suffer but it was justified on the grounds that
> >the high allocation success rates were achieved by aggressive reclaim.
> >Success rates are expected to suffer even more in 3.6 due to commit
> >[7db8889a: mm: have order>  0 compaction start off where it left] which
> >testing has shown to severely reduce allocation success rates under load -
> >to 0% in one case.  There is a proposed change to that patch in this series
> >and it would be ideal if Jim Schutt could retest the workload that led to
> >commit [7db8889a: mm: have order>  0 compaction start off where it left].
> 
> I was successful at resolving my Ceph issue on 3.6-rc1, but ran
> into some other issue that isn't immediately obvious, and prevents
> me from testing your patch with 3.6-rc1.  Today I will apply your
> patch series to 3.5 and test that way.
> 
> Sorry for the delay.
> 

No need to be sorry at all. I appreciate you taking the time and as
there were revisions since V1 you were better off waiting even if you
did not have the Ceph issue!

Thanks.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/