[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <477E75CF.8070608@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:07:11 -0500
From: Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Eric Whitney <eric.whitney@...com>,
Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@...com>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/19] VM pageout scalability improvements
Rik van Riel wrote:
>On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:34:00 +0100
>Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>We can easily [he says, glibly] reproduce the hang on the anon_vma lock
>>>
>>>
>>Is that a NUMA platform? On non x86? Perhaps you just need queued spinlocks?
>>
>>
>
>I really think that the anon_vma and i_mmap_lock spinlock hangs are
>due to the lack of queued spinlocks. Not because I have seen your
>system hang, but because I've seen one of Larry's test systems here
>hang in scary/amusing ways :)
>
Changing the anon_vma->lock into a rwlock_t helps because
page_lock_anon_vma()
can take it for read and thats where the contention is. However its the
fact that under
some tests, most of the pages are in vmas queued to one anon_vma that
causes so much
lock contention.
>
>With queued spinlocks the system should just slow down, not hang.
>
>
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists