Re: Regression from 2.6.36

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:23:11 +0800 Changli Gao <xiaosuo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > It's somewhat unclear (to me) what caused this regression.
> >
> > Is it because the kernel is now doing large kmalloc()s for the fdtable,
> > and this makes the page allocator go nuts trying to satisfy high-order
> > page allocation requests?
> >
> > Is it because the kernel now will usually free the fdtable
> > synchronously within the rcu callback, rather than deferring this to a
> > workqueue?
> >
> > The latter seems unlikely, so I'm thinking this was a case of
> > high-order-allocations-considered-harmful?
> >
> 
> Maybe, but I am not sure. Maybe my patch causes too many inner
> fragments. For example, when asking for 5 pages, get 8 pages, and 3
> pages are wasted, then memory thrash happens finally.

That theory sounds less likely, but could be tested by using
alloc_pages_exact().

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/