lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:21:34 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>, mgorman@...hsingularity.net, tj@...nel.org, hughd@...gle.com, khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru, daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com, willy@...radead.org, hannes@...xchg.org, lkp@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, shakeelb@...gle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, richard.weiyang@...il.com, kirill@...temov.name, alexander.duyck@...il.com, rong.a.chen@...el.com, vdavydov.dev@...il.com, shy828301@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/32] per memcg lru_lock On Mon 24-08-20 11:42:04, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 20:54:33 +0800 Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > > The new version which bases on v5.9-rc2. The first 6 patches was picked into > > linux-mm, and add patch 25-32 that do some further post optimization. > > 32 patches, version 18. That's quite heroic. I'm unsure whether I > should merge it up at this point - what do people think? This really needs a proper review. Unfortunately : 24 files changed, 646 insertions(+), 443 deletions(-) is quite an undertaking to review as well. Especially in a tricky code which is full of surprises. I do agree that per memcg locking looks like a nice feature but I do not see any pressing reason to merge it ASAP. The cover letter doesn't really describe any pressing usecase that cannot really live without this being merged. I am fully aware of my dept to review but I simply cannot find enough time to sit on it and think it through to have a meaningful feedback at this moment. > > Following Daniel Jordan's suggestion, I have run 208 'dd' with on 104 > > containers on a 2s * 26cores * HT box with a modefied case: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/vm-scalability.git/tree/case-lru-file-readtwice > > With this patchset, the readtwice performance increased about 80% > > in concurrent containers. > > That's rather a slight amount of performance testing for a huge > performance patchset! Is more detailed testing planned? Agreed! This needs much better testing coverage. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists