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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:36:53 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie> cc: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Sven Geggus <lists@...hsschwanzdomain.de>, Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>, Tobias Oetiker <tobi@...iker.ch>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@....fi>, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, Mohamed Abbas <mohamed.abbas@...el.com>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@...net.com>, Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] page allocator: Pre-emptively wake kswapd when high-order watermarks are hit On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Hmm, is this really supposed to be added to __alloc_pages_high_priority()? > > By the patch description I was expecting kswapd to be woken up > > preemptively whenever the preferred zone is below ALLOC_WMARK_LOW and > > we're known to have just allocated at a higher order, not just when > > current was oom killed (when we should already be freeing a _lot_ of > > memory soon) or is doing a higher order allocation during direct reclaim. > > > > It was a somewhat arbitrary choice to have it trigger in the event high > priority allocations were happening frequently. > I don't quite understand, users of PF_MEMALLOC shouldn't be doing these higher order allocations and if ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS is by way of the oom killer, we should be freeing a substantial amount of memory imminently when it exits that waking up kswapd would be irrelevant. > > If this is moved to the fastpath, why is this wake_all_kswapd() and not > > wakeup_kswapd(preferred_zone, order)? Do we need to kick kswapd in all > > zones even though they may be free just because preferred_zone is now > > below the watermark? > > > > It probably makes no difference as zones are checked for their watermarks > before any real work happens. However, even if this patch makes a difference, > I don't want to see it merged. At best, it is an extremely heavy-handed > hack which is why I asked for it to be tested in isolation. It shouldn't > be necessary at all because sort of pre-emptive waking of kswapd was never > necessary before. > Ahh, that makes a ton more sense: this particular patch is a debugging effort while the first two are candidates for 2.6.32 and -stable. Gotcha. > > Wouldn't it be better to do this on page_zone(page) instead of > > preferred_zone anyway? > > > > No. The preferred_zone is the zone we should be allocating from. If we > failed to allocate from it, it implies the watermarks are not being met > so we want to wake it. > Oops, I'm even more confused now :) I thought the existing wake_all_kswapd() in the slowpath was doing that and that this patch was waking them prematurely because it speculates that a subsequent high order allocation will fail unless memory is reclaimed. I thought we'd want to reclaim from the zone we just did a high order allocation from so that the fastpath could find the memory next time with ALLOC_WMARK_LOW. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists