Re: [BUG] Page allocation failures with newest kernels

[Mel Gorman]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 07:36:57PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> 
> 
> 2016-06-03 14:36 GMT+02:00 Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 01:57:06PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> >> >> For the record: the newest kernel I was able to reproduce the dumps
> >> >> was v4.6: http://pastebin.com/ekDdACn5. I've just checked v4.7-rc1,
> >> >> which comprise a lot (mainly yours) changes in mm, and I'm wondering
> >> >> if there may be a spot fix or rather a series of improvements. I'm
> >> >> looking forward to your opinion and would be grateful for any advice.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I don't believe we want to reintroduce the reserve to cope with CMA. One
> >> > option would be to widen the gap between low and min watermark by the
> >> > size of the CMA region. The effect would be to wake kswapd earlier which
> >> > matters considering the context of the failing allocation was
> >> > GFP_ATOMIC.
> >>
> >> Of course my intention is not reintroducing anything that's gone
> >> forever, but just to find out way to overcome current issues. Do you
> >> mean increasing CMA size?
> >
> > No. There is a gap between the low and min watermarks. At the low point,
> > kswapd is woken up and at the min point allocation requests either
> > either direct reclaim or fail if they are atomic. What I'm suggesting
> > is that you adjust the low watermark and add the size of the CMA area
> > to it so that kswapd is woken earlier. The watermarks are calculated in
> > __setup_per_zone_wmarks
> >
> 
> I printed all zones' settings, whose watermarks are configured within
> __setup_per_zone_wmarks(). There are three DMA, Normal and Movable -
> only first one's watermarks have non-zero values. Increasing DMA min
> watermark didn't help. I also played with increasing

Patch?

Did you establish why GFP_ATOMIC (assuming that's the failing site) had
not specified __GFP_ATOMIC at the time of the allocation failure?

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs