[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bd474ca4-9f47-0ab1-f461-513789fc074d@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:57:14 -0500
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [mm/hugetlb] c77c0a8ac4: will-it-scale.per_process_ops 15.9%
improvement
On 1/14/20 4:12 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 14-01-20 16:56:37, kernel test robot wrote:
>> Greeting,
>>
>> FYI, we noticed a 15.9% improvement of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
>>
>>
>> commit: c77c0a8ac4c522638a8242fcb9de9496e3cdbb2d ("mm/hugetlb: defer freeing of huge pages if in non-task context")
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> This is more than surprising because the patch has only changed the
> behavior for hugetlb pages freed from the (soft)interrupt context and
> that should be a very rare event. Does the test really generate a lot of
> those?
>
Yes, I have the same question. I was not expecting to see any
performance impact.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists