From: Xueyuan Chen <xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com>
To: zhangbo0325@gmail.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@kernel.org, david@kernel.org,
surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, brendan.jackman@linux.dev,
hannes@cmpxchg.org, ziy@nvidia.com, ljs@kernel.org,
liam@infradead.org, rppt@kernel.org, qi.zheng@linux.dev,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, kasong@tencent.com, baohua@kernel.org,
axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com,
zhaonanzhe@xiaomi.com, lipengfei28@xiaomi.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zhangbo56@xiaomi.com, Xueyuan Chen <xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] mm: compaction: mTHP-friendly memory compaction
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 23:50:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261019155048.3916405-1-xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261001001412.3837085-1-zhangbo56@xiaomi.com>
On Thu, Oct 01, 2026 at 08:14:08AM +0800, Bo Zhang wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>This series improves memory compaction to better serve mTHP (multi-size
>THP) allocations, particularly for small orders like order-2 (16KB).
>The changes focus on the proactive (kcompactd) compaction path.
>
>Problem:
>
>The current proactive compaction targets COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER (order-9,
>2MB), which is unfriendly to mTHP in two ways:
>
>1. It migrates folios that already satisfy mTHP allocation needs. For
> example, an order-2 folio is a valid mTHP page, yet compaction still
> moves it around trying to form order-9 blocks. This is unnecessary
> work and wastes energy.
>
>2. Compaction designed for 2MB huge pages is too heavyweight for mTHP.
> mTHP allocations are frequent and only require small contiguous blocks
> (e.g., 4 pages for order-2). A lighter-weight, mTHP-aware compaction
> strategy is needed to reduce overhead and power consumption.
>
>Approach:
>
>This series makes four changes:
>
>1. Generalize the fragmentation score functions to accept an order
> parameter. This is a pure refactor with no functional change; all
> callers still pass COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER.
>
>2. Use the highest always-enabled mTHP order as the proactive compaction
> target. Because a fragmentation score for a small order is naturally
> much lower than for order-9 under the same fragmentation state, the
> proactive watermark is scaled down in proportion to the target order;
> otherwise a small order would almost never reach the trigger threshold.
>
>3. During proactive compaction (compact_memory), skip isolating folios
> that already satisfy mTHP requirements, avoiding unnecessary migration
> overhead.
>
>4. For non-costly mTHP orders, restrict proactive compaction to movable
> (and CMA) pageblocks. Unmovable/reclaimable blocks are dominated by
> non-migratable kernel allocations. scanning them wastes cycles because
> a small order can be satisfied from movable blocks alone. Costly orders
> keep scanning all blocks, since they are harder to form and benefit
> from any migratable page available.
>
>Test setup:
>
>x86 host, arm64 cross-build (defconfig + CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y,
>CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_DWARF5=y), booted with mem=4G. order-3 (32KB) mTHP is
>set to "always"; ext4 root mounted data=journal. The kernel build
>naturally fragments order-3 free memory during the run.
>
>Runtime (two defrag modes were tested, see Results):
> echo always > .../hugepages-32kB/enabled
> echo madvise > .../transparent_hugepage/defrag # or: always
> echo 20 > /proc/sys/vm/compaction_proactiveness
>
>A background loop keeps proactiveness poked every 100ms so kcompactd
>re-evaluates promptly (its default 500ms interval is too coarse to catch
>the transient order-3 fragmentation peaks under this workload):
>
> while true; do
> echo 20 > /proc/sys/vm/compaction_proactiveness
> sleep 0.1
> done
>
>Workload: make ARCH=arm64 CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu- vmlinux -j28
>5 rounds per configuration; each round: make clean + drop_caches, then
>counter deltas around the build. The baseline is the unmodified kernel.
>
>Results (5-round means). anon_fault_alloc is within 1% between kernels,
>so the fallback numbers are directly comparable.
>
>defrag=madvise:
> w/o patch w/ patch change
> -------------------------- ----------- ----------- --------
> anon_fault_alloc 14,307,597 14,401,699 +1%
> anon_fault_fallback 97,701 40,975 -58%
> fallback ratio 0.68% 0.28%
> compact_isolated 8,479,773 1,458,949 -83%
> compact_migrate_scanned 78,198,828 22,900,359 -71%
> kcompactd cpu (s) 43 7 -84%
> sys (kernel build) 6m34s 6m34s ~0%
>
>defrag=always:
> w/o patch w/ patch change
> -------------------------- ----------- ----------- --------
> anon_fault_alloc 14,370,984 14,404,234 ~0%
> anon_fault_fallback 619 823
> compact_stall 979 585 -40%
> compact_isolated 6,390,940 2,431,800 -62%
> compact_migrate_scanned 86,171,095 46,339,911 -46%
> kcompactd cpu (s) 36 13 -62%
> sys (kernel build) 6m34s 6m27s -1.8%
>
>1. With defrag=madvise, the patch cuts mTHP fallback by 58% (ratio
> 0.68% -> 0.28%).
>
>2. With defrag=always, direct compaction already keeps fallback near
> zero, and the patch instead cuts direct compaction stalls by 40%.
>
>In both cases the compaction is done far more cheaply (kcompactd CPU
>-62..84%, compact_isolated/scanned -46..83%).
Hi Bo,
With proactive compaction enabled, have you measured the change in power
consumption on Android devices after applying this patch series?
>
>Open questions:
>
>1. In skip_isolation_on_order() and elsewhere, the target order is read
> from huge_anon_orders_always directly, since during proactive
> compaction cc->order is -1 (via compact_memory) and there is no clean
> way to plumb the mTHP order down. This variable can change under
> userspace at any time, making the semantics fragile. Ideas on how to
> pass the target order through the proactive path cleanly are welcome.
>
>2. The proactive watermark is scaled linearly by the target order
> (wmark * order / COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER). This is empirical; a more
> principled cross-order normalization of the fragmentation score would
> be welcome.
>
>Changes since v1
>================
>
>The series is now scoped to the proactive compaction path only. Two
>patches from v1 were dropped, and two new mechanisms were added:
>
>- Dropped v1 patch 3 ("don't skip proactive compaction for non-costly
> mTHP", i.e. running proactive compaction concurrently with kswapd).
> Follow-up testing showed it lowered fallback mainly by driving extra
> anonymous reclaim/swap rather than by better compaction; keeping the
> original kswapd back-off avoids trading workingset for mTHP fallback.
>
>- Dropped v1 patch 4 (mTHP-aware zone_effective_free_pages() watermark):
> it added reclaim pressure without a clear net benefit in this scope.
>
>- Split the former patch 1 into a pure refactor (parameterize the
> fragmentation score by order) plus the mTHP-targeting change, so the
> mechanical and behavioural parts can be reviewed independently.
>
>- Added the proactive watermark scaling by target order, so a small mTHP
> order can actually reach the trigger threshold.
>
>- Added patch 4 (skip unmovable blocks for non-costly proactive mTHP
> compaction). Without it, proactive compaction wastes most of its
> scanning on unmovable blocks full of kernel allocations; with it,
> kcompactd's CPU and the scanned/isolated counters drop by an order of
> magnitude while fallback still improves.
>
>- compact_hpage_order() uses __fls() (highest always-enabled mTHP order)
> guarded by #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE (m68k allmodconfig build
> fix from the kernel test robot).
>
>- Refreshed test data on an mem=4G, order-3, data=journal kernel-build
> workload; see Results above.
>
>Bo Zhang (4):
> mm: compaction: parameterize fragmentation score by order
> mm: compaction: target mTHP order for proactive compaction
> mm: compaction: skip isolating large folios that already satisfy mTHP
> mm: compaction: skip unmovable blocks for non-costly proactive mTHP
> compaction
>
> mm/compaction.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>--
>2.34.1
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-19 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-01 0:14 Bo Zhang
2026-10-01 0:14 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] mm: compaction: parameterize fragmentation score by order Bo Zhang
2026-10-01 0:14 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] mm: compaction: target mTHP order for proactive compaction Bo Zhang
2026-10-19 8:12 ` Dev Jain
2026-10-19 14:50 ` Xueyuan Chen
2026-10-19 15:03 ` Bo Zhang
2026-10-20 6:48 ` Dev Jain
2026-10-21 6:18 ` Bo Zhang
2026-10-19 15:47 ` Bo Zhang
2026-10-01 0:14 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] mm: compaction: skip isolating large folios that already satisfy mTHP Bo Zhang
2026-10-01 0:14 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm: compaction: skip unmovable blocks for non-costly proactive mTHP compaction Bo Zhang
2026-10-19 9:43 ` Dev Jain
2026-10-19 15:50 ` Xueyuan Chen [this message]
2026-10-20 14:52 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] mm: compaction: mTHP-friendly memory compaction Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-10-21 6:00 ` Bo Zhang
2026-10-21 9:31 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-10-21 12:31 ` Bo Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261019155048.3916405-1-xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com \
--to=xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.jackman@linux.dev \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lipengfei28@xiaomi.com \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.com \
--cc=zhangbo0325@gmail.com \
--cc=zhangbo56@xiaomi.com \
--cc=zhaonanzhe@xiaomi.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®