[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190724193637.44ced3b82dd76649df28ecf5@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:36:37 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Pengfei Li <lpf.vector@...il.com>
Cc: willy@...radead.org, urezki@...il.com, rpenyaev@...e.de,
peterz@...radead.org, guro@...com, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
rppt@...ux.ibm.com, aryabinin@...tuozzo.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] mm/vmalloc: do not keep unpurged areas in the
busy tree
On Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:26:55 +0800 Pengfei Li <lpf.vector@...il.com> wrote:
> From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>
>
> The busy tree can be quite big, even though the area is freed
> or unmapped it still stays there until "purge" logic removes
> it.
>
> 1) Optimize and reduce the size of "busy" tree by removing a
> node from it right away as soon as user triggers free paths.
> It is possible to do so, because the allocation is done using
> another augmented tree.
>
> The vmalloc test driver shows the difference, for example the
> "fix_size_alloc_test" is ~11% better comparing with default
> configuration:
>
> sudo ./test_vmalloc.sh performance
>
> <default>
> Summary: fix_size_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 993985 usec
> Summary: full_fit_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 973554 usec
> Summary: long_busy_list_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 12617652 usec
> <default>
>
> <this patch>
> Summary: fix_size_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 882263 usec
> Summary: full_fit_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 973407 usec
> Summary: long_busy_list_alloc_test loops: 1000000 avg: 12593929 usec
> <this patch>
>
> 2) Since the busy tree now contains allocated areas only and does
> not interfere with lazily free nodes, introduce the new function
> show_purge_info() that dumps "unpurged" areas that is propagated
> through "/proc/vmallocinfo".
>
> 3) Eliminate VM_LAZY_FREE flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com>
This should have included your signed-off-by, since you were on the
patch delivery path. (Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst,
section 11).
Please send along your signed-off-by?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists