linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v6)

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:	Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:01:29 +0100
From:	Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v6)

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 08:52:44AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:27:09 +0100
> Andrea Righi <arighi@...eler.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:03:07AM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> 
> > > I am still setting up the system to test whether we see any speedup in
> > > writeout of large files with-in a memory cgroup with small memory limits.
> > > I am assuming that we are expecting a speedup because we will start
> > > writeouts early and background writeouts probably are faster than direct
> > > reclaim?
> > 
> > mmh... speedup? I think with a large file write + reduced dirty limits
> > you'll get a more uniform write-out (more frequent small writes),
> > respect to few and less frequent large writes. The system will be more
> > reactive, but I don't think you'll be able to see a speedup in the large
> > write itself.
> > 
> Ah, sorry. I misunderstood something. But it's depends on dirty_ratio param.
> If
> 	background_dirty_ratio = 5
> 	dirty_ratio	       = 100
> under 100M cgroup, I think background write-out will be a help.

Right, in this case background flusher threads will help a lot to
write-out the cgroup dirty memory and it'll get better performance.

-Andrea
--
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/