linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] the proposal of improve page reclaim by throttle

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:49:03 +0900
From:	"minchan Kim" <barrioskmc@...il.com>
To:	"KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Balbir Singh" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>,
	"Lee Schermerhorn" <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] the proposal of improve page reclaim by throttle

On Feb 20, 2008 6:24 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi Kim-san
>
> Do you adjust hackbench parameter?
> my parameter adjust my test machine(8GB mem),
> if unchanged, maybe doesn't works it because lack memory.

I already adjusted it. :-)
But, In my desktop, I couldn't make to consune my swap device above
half. (My swap device is 512M size)
Because my kernel almost was hang before happening many swapping.
Perhaps, it might be a not hang.  However, Although I wait a very long
time, My box don't have a any response.
I will try do it more.

> > I am a many interested in your patch. so I want to test it with exact
> > same method as you did.
> > I will test it in embedded environment(ARM 920T, 32M ram) and my
> > desktop machine.(Core2Duo 2.2G, 2G ram)
>
> Hm
> I don't have embedded test machine.
> but I can desktop.
> I will test it about weekend.
> if you don't mind, could you please send me .config file
> and tell me your test kernel version?

I mean I will test your patch by myself.
Because I already have a embedded board and Desktop.

> Thanks, interesting report.
>
>
> > I guess this patch won't be efficient in embedded environment.
> > Since many embedded board just have one processor and don't have any
> > swap device.
>
> reclaim conflict rarely happened on UP.
> thus, my patch expect no improvement.

I agree with you.

> but (of course) I will fix regression.

I didn't say your patch had a regression.
What I mean is just that I am concern about it.
Actually, Many VM guys is working on server environment.
They didn't try to do performance test in embedde system.
and that patch was submitted in mainline.

Actually, I am concern about it.

> > So, How do I evaluate following field as you did ?
> >
> >  * elapse (what do you mean it ??)
> >  * major fault
>
> /usr/bin/time command output that.
>
>
> >  * max parallel reclaim tasks:
> >  *  max consumption time of
> >         try_to_free_pages():
>
> sorry, I inserted debug code to my patch at that time.
>

Could you send me that debug code ?
If you will send it to me, I will test it my environment (ARM-920T, Core2Duo).
And I will report test result.

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