[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091112202748.GC2811@think>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:27:48 -0500
From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Sven Geggus <lists@...hsschwanzdomain.de>,
Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>,
Tobias Oetiker <tobi@...iker.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@...net.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Reduce GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures, candidate
fix V3
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:30:06PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Sorry for the long delay in posting another version. Testing is extremely
> time-consuming and I wasn't getting to work on this as much as I'd have liked.
>
> Changelog since V2
> o Dropped the kswapd-quickly-notice-high-order patch. In more detailed
> testing, it made latencies even worse as kswapd slept more on high-order
> congestion causing order-0 direct reclaims.
> o Added changes to how congestion_wait() works
> o Added a number of new patches altering the behaviour of reclaim
>
> Since 2.6.31-rc1, there have been an increasing number of GFP_ATOMIC
> failures. A significant number of these have been high-order GFP_ATOMIC
> failures and while they are generally brushed away, there has been a large
> increase in them recently and there are a number of possible areas the
> problem could be in - core vm, page writeback and a specific driver. The
> bugs affected by this that I am aware of are;
Thanks for all the time you've spent on this one. Let me start with
some more questions about the workload ;)
> 2. A crypted work partition and swap partition was created. On my
> own setup, I gave no passphrase so it'd be easier to activate without
> interaction but there are multiple options. I should have taken better
> notes but the setup goes something like this;
>
> cryptsetup create -y crypt-partition /dev/sda5
> pvcreate /dev/mapper/crypt-partition
> vgcreate crypt-volume /dev/mapper/crypt-partition
> lvcreate -L 5G -n crypt-logical crypt-volume
> lvcreate -L 2G -n crypt-swap crypt-volume
> mkfs -t ext3 /dev/crypt-volume/crypt-logical
> mkswap /dev/crypt-volume/crypt-swap
>
> 3. With the partition mounted on /scratch, I
> cd /scratch
> mkdir music
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git linux-2.6
>
> 4. On a normal partition, I expand a tarball containing test scripts available at
> http://www.csn.ul.ie/~mel/postings/latency-20091112/latency-tests-with-results.tar.gz
>
> There are two helper programs that run as part of the test - a fake
> music player and a fake gitk.
>
> The fake music player uses rsync with bandwidth limits to start
> downloading a music folder from another machine. It's bandwidth
> limited to simulate playing music over NFS.
So the workload is gitk reading a git repo and a program reading data
over the network. Which part of the workload writes to disk?
-chris
--
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