[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160331010002.GA20652@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 01:00:03 +0000
From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
CC: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: optimize minimum size (min_size) accounting
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 04:44:58PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> It was observed that minimum size accounting associated with the
> hugetlbfs min_size mount option may not perform optimally and as
> expected. As huge pages/reservations are released from the filesystem
> and given back to the global pools, they are reserved for subsequent
> filesystem use as long as the subpool reserved count is less than
> subpool minimum size. It does not take into account used pages
> within the filesystem. The filesystem size limits are not exceeded
> and this is technically not a bug. However, better behavior would
> be to wait for the number of used pages/reservations associated with
> the filesystem to drop below the minimum size before taking reservations
> to satisfy minimum size.
>
> An optimization is also made to the hugepage_subpool_get_pages()
> routine which is called when pages/reservations are allocated. This
> does not change behavior, but simply avoids the accounting if all
> reservations have already been taken (subpool reserved count == 0).
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Seems OK to me.
Acked-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists