[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <505C70C8.5010406@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:51:04 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Richard Davies <richard@...chsys.com>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
QEMU-devel <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Reduce compaction scanning and lock contention
On 09/21/2012 06:46 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Richard Davies and Shaohua Li have both reported lock contention
> problems in compaction on the zone and LRU locks as well as
> significant amounts of time being spent in compaction. This series
> aims to reduce lock contention and scanning rates to reduce that CPU
> usage. Richard reported at https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/21/91 that
> this series made a big different to a problem he reported in August
> (http://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=134511507015614&w=2).
> One way or the other, this series has a large impact on the amount of
> scanning compaction does when there is a storm of THP allocations.
Andrew,
Mel and I have discussed the stuff in this series quite a bit,
and I am convinced this is the way forward with compaction.
--
All rights reversed
--
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