[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=kJ-r=bZqB8X+KAu+ueapXYLjxnLNRdxRAkDGWk4k_AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:35:37 -0700
From: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To: Hiroyuki Kamezawa <kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/8] mm: memcg naturalization -rc2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Hiroyuki Kamezawa
<kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com> wrote:
> 2011/6/1 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is the second version of the memcg naturalization series. The
>> notable changes since the first submission are:
>>
>> o the hierarchy walk is now intermittent and will abort and
>> remember the last scanned child after sc->nr_to_reclaim pages
>> have been reclaimed during the walk in one zone (Rik)
>>
>> o the global lru lists are never scanned when memcg is enabled
>> after #2 'memcg-aware global reclaim', which makes this patch
>> self-sufficient and complete without requiring the per-memcg lru
>> lists to be exclusive (Michal)
>>
>> o renamed sc->memcg and sc->current_memcg to sc->target_mem_cgroup
>> and sc->mem_cgroup and fixed their documentation, I hope this is
>> better understandable now (Rik)
>>
>> o the reclaim statistic counters have been renamed. there is no
>> more distinction between 'pgfree' and 'pgsteal', it is now
>> 'pgreclaim' in both cases; 'kswapd' has been replaced by
>> 'background'
>>
>> o fixed a nasty crash in the hierarchical soft limit check that
>> happened during global reclaim in memcgs that are hierarchical
>> but have no hierarchical parents themselves
>>
>> o properly implemented the memcg-aware unevictable page rescue
>> scanner, there were several blatant bugs in there
>>
>> o documentation on new public interfaces
>>
>> Thanks for your input on the first version.
>>
>> I ran microbenchmarks (sparse file catting, essentially) to stress
>> reclaim and LRU operations. There is no measurable overhead for
>> !CONFIG_MEMCG, memcg disabled during boot, memcg enabled but no
>> configured groups, and hard limit reclaim.
>>
>> I also ran single-threaded kernbenchs in four unlimited memcgs in
>> parallel, contained in a hard-limited hierarchical parent that put
>> constant pressure on the workload. There is no measurable difference
>> in runtime, the pgpgin/pgpgout counters, and fairness among memcgs in
>> this test compared to an unpatched kernel. Needs more evaluation,
>> especially with a higher number of memcgs.
>>
>> The soft limit changes are also proven to work in so far that it is
>> possible to prioritize between children in a hierarchy under pressure
>> and that runtime differences corresponded directly to the soft limit
>> settings in the previously described kernbench setup with staggered
>> soft limits on the groups, but this needs quantification.
>>
>> Based on v2.6.39.
>>
>
> Hmm, I welcome and will review this patches but.....some points I want to say.
>
> 1. No more conflict with Ying's work ?
> Could you explain what she has and what you don't in this v2 ?
> If Ying's one has something good to be merged to your set, please
> include it.
>
> 2. it's required to see performance score in commit log.
>
> 3. I think dirty_ratio as 1st big patch to be merged. (But...hmm..Greg ?
> My patches for asynchronous reclaim is not very important. I can rework it.
I am testing the next version (v8) of the memcg dirty ratio patches. I expect
to have it posted for review later this week.
> 4. This work can be splitted into some small works.
> a) fix for current code and clean ups
> a') statistics
> b) soft limit rework
> c) change global reclaim
>
> I like (a)->(b)->(c) order. and while (b) you can merge your work
> with Ying's one.
> And for a') , I'd like to add a new file memory.reclaim_stat as I've
> already shown.
> and allow resetting.
>
> Hmm, how about splitting patch 2/8 into small patches and see what happens in
> 3.2 or 3.3 ? While that, we can make softlimit works better.
> (and once we do 2/8, our direction will be fixed to the direction to
> remove global LRU.)
>
> 5. please write documentation to explain what new LRU do.
>
> BTW, after this work, lists of ROOT cgroup comes again. I may need to check
> codes which see memcg is ROOT or not. Because we removed many atomic
> ops in memcg, I wonder ROOT cgroup can be accounted again..
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
--
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