[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220114020055.0cd8697a@PC>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 02:00:55 +0900
From: Alexey Avramov <hakavlad0@...nam.cz>
To: mhocko@...e.com
Cc: Hi-Angel@...dex.ru, Michael@...haellarabel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
catalin.marinas@....com, corbet@....net,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hakavlad@...ox.lv, hannes@...xchg.org,
hdanton@...a.com, jsbarnes@...gle.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, mgorman@...e.de,
page-reclaim@...gle.com, riel@...riel.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, will@...nel.org,
willy@...radead.org, x86@...nel.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
yuzhao@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/9] mm: multigenerational lru: aging
> But the later one is more complex and a proper
> handling really depends on the particular workload
That is why I advocate the introduction of new tunables.
> There are workloads which prefer a temporary trashing over its working
> set during a peak memory demand rather than an OOM kill
OK, for such cases, the OOM handles can be set to 0.
It can even be the default value.
> On the other side workloads that are
> latency sensitive
I daresay that this is the case with most workloads.
An internet server that falls into thrashing is a dead server.
> no simple solution can be applied to the whole
There are several solutions and they can be taken into the kernel
at the same time, they all work:
- min_ttl_ms + MGLRU
- vm.min_filelist_kbytes-like knobs
- PSI-based solutions.
> For the most steady trashing situations I have
> seen the userspace with mlocked memory and the code can make a forward
> progress and mediate the situation.
I still don't see a problem in making all the kernel-space solutions
in the kernel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists