[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1296580547.27022.3370.camel@nimitz>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 09:15:47 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Michael J Wolf <mjwolf@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] more detailed per-process transparent
hugepage statistics
On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 16:38 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 04:33:57PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > I'm working on some more reports that transparent huge pages and
> > KSM do not play nicely together. Basically, whenever THP's are
> > present along with KSM, there is a lot of attrition over time,
> > and we do not see much overall progress keeping THP's around:
> >
> > http://sr71.net/~dave/ibm/038_System_Anonymous_Pages.png
> >
> > (That's Karl Rister's graph, thanks Karl!)
>
> Well if the pages_sharing/pages_shared count goes up, this is a
> feature not a bug.... You need to print that too in the chart to show
> this is not ok
Here are the KSM sharing bits for the same run:
http://sr71.net/~dave/ibm/009_KSM_Pages.png
It bounces around a little bit on the ends, but it's fairly static
during the test, even when there's a good downward slope on the THP's.
Hot of the presses, Karl also managed to do a run last night with the
khugepaged scanning rates turned all the way up:
http://sr71.net/~dave/ibm/038_System_Anonymous_Pages-scan-always.png
The THP's there are a lot more stable. I'd read that as saying that the
scanning probably just isn't keeping up with whatever is breaking the
pages up.
> KSM will slowdown performance also during copy-on-writes when
> pages_sharing goes up, not only because of creating non-linearity
> inside 2m chunks (which makes mandatory to use ptes and not hugepmd,
> it's not an inefficiency of some sort that can be optimized away
> unfortunately). We sure could change KSM to merge 2M pages instead of
> 4k pages, but then the memory-density would decrease of several order
> of magnitudes making the KSM scan almost useless (ok, with guest
> heavily using THP that may change, but all pagecache is still 4k... so
> for now it'd be next to useless).
Yup, unless we do something special, the odds of sharing those 2MB
suckers are near zero.
> I would prefer to close the issues that you just previously reported,
> sometime with mmap_sem and issues like that, before adding more
> features though but I don't want to defer things either so it's up to
> you.
I'm happy to hold on to them for another release. I'm actually going to
go look at the freezes I saw now that I have these out in the wild.
I'll probably stick them in a git tree and keep them up to date.
Are there any other THP issues you're chasing at the moment?
-- Dave
--
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