Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/i915: Remove __GFP_NORETRY from our buffer allocator

2017-06-13 Thread Joonas Lahtinen
On pe, 2017-06-09 at 12:03 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > I tried __GFP_NORETRY in the belief that __GFP_RECLAIM was effective. It > struggles with handling reclaim of our dirty buffers and relies on > reclaim via kswapd. As a result, a single pass of direct reclaim is > unreliable when i915 occupies

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/i915: Remove __GFP_NORETRY from our buffer allocator

2017-06-09 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 09-06-17 12:03:47, Chris Wilson wrote: > I tried __GFP_NORETRY in the belief that __GFP_RECLAIM was effective. It > struggles with handling reclaim of our dirty buffers and relies on > reclaim via kswapd. As a result, a single pass of direct reclaim is > unreliable when i915 occupies the maj

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 2/5] drm/i915: Remove __GFP_NORETRY from our buffer allocator

2017-06-09 Thread Chris Wilson
I tried __GFP_NORETRY in the belief that __GFP_RECLAIM was effective. It struggles with handling reclaim of our dirty buffers and relies on reclaim via kswapd. As a result, a single pass of direct reclaim is unreliable when i915 occupies the majority of available memory, and the only means of effec