[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+2MQi9900FU9+=j7EM2YEH5=Dg0wH9-GvfZDhop6kGO_=a2Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 21:45:17 +0800
From: Liang Li <liliang324@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Liang Li <liliangleo@...iglobal.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/4] speed up page allocation for __GFP_ZERO
> > Win or not depends on its effect. For our case, it solves the issue
> > that we faced, so it can be thought as a win for us. If others don't
> > have the issue we faced, the result will be different, maybe they will
> > be affected by the side effect of this feature. I think this is your
> > concern behind the question. right? I will try to do more tests and
> > provide more benchmark performance data.
>
> Yes, zeroying memory does have a noticeable overhead but we cannot
> simply allow tasks to spil over this overhead to all other users by
> default. So if anything this would need to be an opt-in feature
> configurable by administrator.
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
I know the overhead, so I add a switch in /sys/ to enable or disable
it dynamically.
Thanks
Liang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists