[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150520164419.GT2462@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 17:44:19 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Linux-CGroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, memcg: Optionally disable memcg by default using
Kconfig
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:24:21PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >
> > Low thread counts get a small boost but it's within noise as memcg overhead
> > does not dominate. It's not obvious at all at higher thread counts as other
> > factors cause more problems. The overall breakdown of CPU usage looks like
> >
> > 4.0.0 4.0.0
> > chargefirst-v2r1disable-v2r1
> > User 41.81 41.45
> > System 407.64 405.50
> > Elapsed 128.17 127.06
>
> This is a worst case microbenchmark doing nothing but anonymous page
> faults (with THP disabled), and yet the performance difference is in
> the noise. I don't see why we should burden the user with making a
> decision that doesn't matter in theory, let alone in practice.
>
> We have CONFIG_MEMCG and cgroup_disable=memory, that should be plenty
> for users that obsess about fluctuation in the noise. There is no
> reason to complicate the world further for everybody else.
FWIW, I agree and only included this patch because I said I would
yesterday. After patch 1, there is almost no motivation to disable memcg
at all let alone by default.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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