[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090828151011.GS4889@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:40:11 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/5] memcg: uncharge in batched manner
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> [2009-08-28 13:24:38]:
>
> In massive parallel enviroment, res_counter can be a performance bottleneck.
> This patch is a trial for reducing lock contention.
> One strong techinque to reduce lock contention is reducing calls by
> batching some amount of calls int one.
>
> Considering charge/uncharge chatacteristic,
> - charge is done one by one via demand-paging.
> - uncharge is done by
> - in chunk at munmap, truncate, exit, execve...
> - one by one via vmscan/paging.
>
> It seems we hace a chance to batched-uncharge.
> This patch is a base patch for batched uncharge. For avoiding
> scattering memcg's structure, this patch adds memcg batch uncharge
> information to the task. please see start/end usage in next patch.
>
Overall it is a very good idea, can't we do the uncharge at the poin
tof unmap_vmas, exit_mmap, etc so that we don't have to keep
additional data structures around.
--
Balbir
--
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