[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F4646D6.6070900@openvz.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:01:58 +0400
From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
"tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] mm: lru_lock splitting
Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 09:11:32AM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> Konstantin Khlebnikov<khlebnikov@...nvz.org> writes:
>>>
>>> Konstantin,
>>>
>>>> There complete patch-set with my lru_lock splitting
>>>> plus all related preparations and cleanups rebased to next-20120210
>>>
>>> On large systems we're also seeing lock contention on the lru_lock
>>> without using memcgs. Any thoughts how this could be extended for this
>>> situation too?
>>
>> We can split lru_lock by pfn-based interleaving.
>> After all these cleanups it is very easy. I already have patch for this.
>
> Cool. If you send it can try it out on a large system.
See last patch in v3 patchset in lkml or in
git: https://github.com/koct9i/linux/commits/lruvec-v3
>
> This would split the LRU by pfn too, correct?
Of course, I don't see any problems with splitting large zone into some
independent pages subsets. But all sub-pages in huge-page should be in one lru,
that's why I use pfn-based interleaving.
>
> -Andi
--
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