[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130802201301.A872BE0090@blue.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 23:13:01 +0300 (EEST)
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Add per-process flag to control thp
Alex Thorlton wrote:
> This patch implements functionality to allow processes to disable the use of
> transparent hugepages through the prctl syscall.
>
> We've determined that some jobs perform significantly better with thp disabled,
> and we need a way to control thp on a per-process basis, without relying on
> madvise.
What kind of workloads are you talking about?
What's wrong with madvise? Could you elaborate?
And I think thp_disabled should be reset to 0 on exec.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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