[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <ebef70ed-1eff-8406-f26b-3ed260c0db22@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 14:50:04 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Zi Yan <zi.yan@...rutgers.edu>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrea Reale <ar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, numa: rework do_pages_move
On 01/05/2018 02:44 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 05-01-18 09:22:22, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> [...]
>> Hi Michal,
>>
>> After slightly modifying your test case (like fixing the page size for
>> powerpc and just doing simple migration from node 0 to 8 instead of the
>> interleaving), I tried to measure the migration speed with and without
>> the patches on mainline. Its interesting....
>>
>> 10000 pages | 100000 pages
>> --------------------------
>> Mainline 165 ms 1674 ms
>> Mainline + first patch (move_pages) 191 ms 1952 ms
>> Mainline + all three patches 146 ms 1469 ms
>>
>> Though overall it gives performance improvement, some how it slows
>> down migration after the first patch. Will look into this further.
>
> What are you measuring actually? All pages migrated to the same node?
The mount of time move_pages() system call took to move these many
pages from node 0 to node 8. Yeah they migrated to the same node.
> Do you have any profiles? How stable are the results?
No, are you referring to perf record kind profile ? Results were
repeating.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists