[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e01d912-9473-35df-5bc7-f080ab9c1818@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:29:54 +0100
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] try to reduce fragmenting fallbacks
On 03/16/2017 07:34 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 08:17:39PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 8.3.2017 17:46, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>>> Is there any other data you would like me to gather?
>>
>> If you can enable the extfrag tracepoint, it would be nice to have graphs of how
>> unmovable allocations falling back to movable pageblocks, etc.
>
> Okay, here we go. I recorded 24 hours worth of the extfrag tracepoint,
> filtered to fallbacks from unmovable requests to movable blocks. I've
> uploaded the plot here:
>
> http://cmpxchg.org/antifrag/fallbackrate.png
>
> but this already speaks for itself:
>
> 11G alloc-mtfallback.trace
> 3.3G alloc-mtfallback-patched.trace
>
> ;)
Great!
>> Possibly also /proc/pagetypeinfo for numbers of pageblock types.
> After a week of uptime, the patched (b) kernel has more movable blocks
> than vanilla 4.10-rc8 (a):
>
> Number of blocks type Unmovable Movable Reclaimable HighAtomic CMA Isolate
>
> a: Node 1, zone Normal 2017 29763 987 1 0 0
> b: Node 1, zone Normal 1264 30850 653 1 0 0
That's better than I expected. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of
unmovable pageblocks actually got *higher* due to the series because
previously many unmovable pages would be scattered around movable blocks.
> I sampled this somewhat sporadically over the week and it's been
> reading reliably this way.
>
> The patched kernel also consistently beats vanilla in terms of peak
> job throughput.
>
> Overall very cool!
Thanks a lot! So that means it's worth the increased compaction stats
you reported earlier?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists