lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:19 +0100 From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> CC: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Ebru Akagunduz <ebru.akagunduz@...il.com>, Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] the big khugepaged redesign On 02/23/2015 11:46 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 13:58 +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> Recently, there was concern expressed (e.g. [1]) whether the quite aggressive >> THP allocation attempts on page faults are a good performance trade-off. >> >> - THP allocations add to page fault latency, as high-order allocations are >> notoriously expensive. Page allocation slowpath now does extra checks for >> GFP_TRANSHUGE && !PF_KTHREAD to avoid the more expensive synchronous >> compaction for user page faults. But even async compaction can be expensive. >> - During the first page fault in a 2MB range we cannot predict how much of the >> range will be actually accessed - we can theoretically waste as much as 511 >> worth of pages [2]. Or, the pages in the range might be accessed from CPUs >> from different NUMA nodes and while base pages could be all local, THP could >> be remote to all but one CPU. The cost of remote accesses due to this false >> sharing would be higher than any savings on the TLB. >> - The interaction with memcg are also problematic [1]. >> >> Now I don't have any hard data to show how big these problems are, and I >> expect we will discuss this on LSF/MM (and hope somebody has such data [3]). >> But it's certain that e.g. SAP recommends to disable THPs [4] for their apps >> for performance reasons. > > There are plenty of examples of this, ie for Oracle: > > https://blogs.oracle.com/linux/entry/performance_issues_with_transparent_huge > http://oracle-base.com/articles/linux/configuring-huge-pages-for-oracle-on-linux-64.php Just stumbled upon more references when catching up on lwn: http://lwn.net/Articles/634797/ -- 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