[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080605110637.d50af953.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:06:37 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] page reclaim throttle v7
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:12:11 +0900
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> I post latest version of page reclaim patch series.
>
> This patch is holding up very well under usex stress test
> over 24+ hours :)
>
>
> Against: 2.6.26-rc2-mm1
>
I like this series and I'd like to support this under memcg when
this goes to mainline. (it seems better to test this for a while
before adding some memcg-related changes.)
Then, please give me inputs.
What do you think do I have to do for supporting this in memcg ?
Handling the case of scan_global_lru(sc)==false is enough ?
Thanks,
-Kame
>
> changelog
> ========================================
> v6 -> v7
> o rebase to 2.6.26-rc2-mm1
> o get_vm_stat: make cpu-unplug safety.
> o mark vm_max_nr_task_per_zone __read_mostly.
> o add check __GFP_FS, __GFP_IO for avoid deadlock.
> o fixed compile error on x86_64.
>
> v5 -> v6
> o rebase to 2.6.25-mm1
> o use PGFREE statics instead wall time.
> o separate function type change patch and introduce throttle patch.
>
> v4 -> v5
> o rebase to 2.6.25-rc8-mm1
>
> v3 -> v4:
> o fixed recursive shrink_zone problem.
> o add last_checked variable in shrink_zone for
> prevent corner case regression.
>
> v2 -> v3:
> o use wake_up() instead wake_up_all()
> o max reclaimers can be changed Kconfig option and sysctl.
> o some cleanups
>
> v1 -> v2:
> o make per zone throttle
>
>
>
> background
> =====================================
> current VM implementation doesn't has limit of # of parallel reclaim.
> when heavy workload, it bring to 2 bad things
> - heavy lock contention
> - unnecessary swap out
>
> at end of last year, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki proposed the patch of page
> reclaim throttle and explain it improve reclaim time.
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=119667465917215&w=2
>
> but unfortunately it works only memcgroup reclaim.
> since, I implement it again for support global reclaim and mesure it.
>
>
> benefit
> =====================================
> <<1. fix the bug of incorrect OOM killer>>
>
> if do following commanc, sometimes OOM killer happened.
> (OOM happend about 10%)
>
> $ ./hackbench 125 process 1000
>
> because following bad scenario is happend.
>
> 1. memory shortage happend.
> 2. many task call shrink_zone at the same time.
> 3. thus, All page are isolated from LRU at the same time.
> 4. the last task can't isolate any page from LRU.
> 5. it cause reclaim failure.
> 6. it cause OOM killer.
>
> my patch is directly solution for that problem.
>
>
> <<2. performance improvement>>
> I mesure RvR Split LRU series + page reclaim throttle series performance by hackbench.
>
> result number mean seconds (i.e. smaller is better)
>
>
> + split_lru improvement
> num_group 2.6.26-rc2-mm1 + throttle ratio
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 100 28.383 28.247
> 110 31.237 30.83
> 120 33.282 33.473
> 130 36.530 37.356
> 140 101.041 44.873 >200%
> 150 795.020 96.265 >800%
>
>
> Why this patch imrove performance?
>
> vanilla kernel get unstable performance at swap happend because
> unnecessary swap out happend freqently.
> this patch doesn't improvement best case, but be able to prevent worst case.
> thus, The average performance of hackbench increase largely.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@...ck.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
>
--
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