Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 06 Sep 2001 16:16:05 +0100 | From | Alex Bligh - linux-kernel <> | Subject | Re: page_launder() on 2.4.9/10 issue |
| |
--On Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:07 PM -0300 Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br> wrote:
> On many systems, higher-order allocations are a really really > small fraction of the allocations, so ideally we'd have them > take the burden of memory fragmentation and won't punish the > normal allocations.
The only nit being, every instance Stephan's reported so far, and in most other reports I've seen, the allocation has been GFP_ATOMIC (i.e. with mask without __GFP_WAIT). For non-atomic >0 order allocations we already have some good logic that does (b) via page_launder(), and where necessary reclaim_page(),__free_page().
So waiting until we are in the high order allocation allocation is too late, as we don't have room to move.
I think we need to defragment / avoid fragmentation BEFORE the GFP_ATOMIC high order allocation comes along. I have some ideas I'd like to test tonight.
-- Alex Bligh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |