When early zone reclaim is turned on the LRU is scanned more frequently when a
zone is low on memory. This limits when the zone reclaim can be called by
skipping the scan if another thread (either via kswapd or sync reclaim) is
already reclaiming from the zone.
Signed-off-by: Martin Hicks <mort@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
This is the core of the (much simplified) early reclaim. The goal of this
patch is to reclaim some easily-freed pages from a zone before falling back
onto another zone.
One of the major uses of this is NUMA machines. With the default allocator
behavior the allocator would look for memory in another zone, which might be
off-node, before trying to reclaim from the current zone.
This adds a zone tuneable to enable early zone reclaim. It is selected on a
per-zone basis and is turned on/off via syscall.
Adding some extra throttling on the reclaim was also required (patch
4/4). Without the machine would grind to a crawl when doing a "make -j"
kernel build. Even with this patch the System Time is higher on
average, but it seems tolerable. Here are some numbers for kernbench
runs on a 2-node, 4cpu, 8Gig RAM Altix in the "make -j" run:
wall user sys %cpu ctx sw. sleeps
---- ---- --- ---- ------ ------
No patch 1009 1384 847 258 298170 504402
w/patch, no reclaim 880 1376 667 288 254064 396745
w/patch & reclaim 1079 1385 926 252 291625 548873
These numbers are the average of 2 runs of 3 "make -j" runs done right
after system boot. Run-to-run variability for "make -j" is huge, so
these numbers aren't terribly useful except to seee that with reclaim
the benchmark still finishes in a reasonable amount of time.
I also looked at the NUMA hit/miss stats for the "make -j" runs and the
reclaim doesn't make any difference when the machine is thrashing away.
Doing a "make -j8" on a single node that is filled with page cache pages
takes 700 seconds with reclaim turned on and 735 seconds without reclaim
(due to remote memory accesses).
The simple zone_reclaim syscall program is at
http://www.bork.org/~mort/sgi/zone_reclaim.c
Signed-off-by: Martin Hicks <mort@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Here's the next round of these patches. These are totally different in
an attempt to meet the "simpler" request after the last patches. For
reference the earlier threads are:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110839604924587&w=2http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-mm&m=111461480721249&w=2
This set of patches replaces my other vm- patches that are currently in
-mm. So they're against 2.6.12-rc5-mm1 about half way through the -mm
patchset.
As I said already this patch is a lot simpler. The reclaim is turned on
or off on a per-zone basis using a syscall. I haven't tested the x86
syscall, so it might be wrong. It uses the existing reclaim/pageout
code with the small addition of a may_swap flag to scan_control
(patch 1/4).
I also added __GFP_NORECLAIM (patch 3/4) so that certain allocation
types can be flagged to never cause reclaim. This was a deficiency
that was in all of my earlier patch sets. Previously, doing a big
buffered read would fill one zone with page cache and then start to
reclaim from that same zone, leaving the other zones untouched.
Adding some extra throttling on the reclaim was also required (patch
4/4). Without the machine would grind to a crawl when doing a "make -j"
kernel build. Even with this patch the System Time is higher on
average, but it seems tolerable. Here are some numbers for kernbench
runs on a 2-node, 4cpu, 8Gig RAM Altix in the "make -j" run:
wall user sys %cpu ctx sw. sleeps
---- ---- --- ---- ------ ------
No patch 1009 1384 847 258 298170 504402
w/patch, no reclaim 880 1376 667 288 254064 396745
w/patch & reclaim 1079 1385 926 252 291625 548873
These numbers are the average of 2 runs of 3 "make -j" runs done right
after system boot. Run-to-run variability for "make -j" is huge, so
these numbers aren't terribly useful except to seee that with reclaim
the benchmark still finishes in a reasonable amount of time.
I also looked at the NUMA hit/miss stats for the "make -j" runs and the
reclaim doesn't make any difference when the machine is thrashing away.
Doing a "make -j8" on a single node that is filled with page cache pages
takes 700 seconds with reclaim turned on and 735 seconds without reclaim
(due to remote memory accesses).
The simple zone_reclaim syscall program is at
http://www.bork.org/~mort/sgi/zone_reclaim.c
This patch:
This adds an extra switch to the scan_control struct. It simply lets the
reclaim code know if its allowed to swap pages out.
This was required for a simple per-zone reclaimer. Without this addition
pages would be swapped out as soon as a zone ran out of memory and the early
reclaim kicked in.
Signed-off-by: Martin Hicks <mort@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Fix a problem identified by Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
kswapd will set a zone into all_unreclaimable state if it sees that we're not
successfully reclaiming LRU pages. But that fails to notice that we're
successfully reclaiming slab obects, so we can set all_unreclaimable too soon.
So change shrink_slab() to return a success indication if it actually
reclaimed some objects, and don't assume that the zone is all_unreclaimable if
that is true. This means that we won't enter all_unreclaimable state if we
are successfully freeing slab objects but we're not yet actually freeing slab
pages, due to internal fragmentation.
(hm, this has a shortcoming. We could be successfully freeing ZONE_NORMAL
slab objects while being really oom on ZONE_DMA. If that happens then kswapd
might burn a lot of CPU. But given that there might be some slab objects in
ZONE_DMA, perhaps that is appropriate.)
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
)
We only call pageout() for dirty pages, so this test is redundant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
Martin Hicks