[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 12/12] mm, page_alloc: Only enforce watermarks for order-0 allocations
On 09/30/2015 04:16 PM, Vitaly Wool wrote:
>>>> So what do you suggest instead? A fixed number, some other heuristic?
>>>> You have pushed several times now for the series to focus on the latency
>>>> of standard high-order allocations but again I will say that it is
>>>> outside
>>>> the scope of this series. If you want to take steps to reduce the latency
>>>> of ordinary high-order allocation requests that can sleep then it should
>>>> be a separate series.
>>> I do believe does a better job
>> Does a better job regarding what exactly? It does fix the CMA-specific
>> issue, but so does this patch - without affecting allocation fastpaths by
>> making them update another counter. But the issues discussed here are not
>> related to that CMA problem.
> Let me disagree. Guaranteeing one suitable high-order page is not
> enough, so the suggested patch does not work that well for me.
> Existing broken watermark calculation doesn't work for me either, as
> opposed to the one with my patch applied. Both solutions are related
> to the CMA issue but one does make compaction work harder and cause
> bigger latencies -- why do you think these are not related?

Well you didn't mention which issues you have with this patch. If you
did measure bigger latencies and more compaction work, please post the
numbers and details about the test.

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-30 17:01    [W:0.074 / U:2.812 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site