[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YTdoesOHCNoe+rGH@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 09:26:18 -0400
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm : bail out from psi memstall after submit_bio in
swap_readpage
On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 08:15:30PM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 8:03 PM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
> >
> > On 9/7/21 13:59, Huangzhaoyang wrote:
> > > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
> > >
> > > It doesn't make sense to count IO time into psi memstall. Bail out after
> > > bio submitted.
> >
> > Isn't that the point if psi, to observe real stalls, which include IO?
Yes, correct.
> IO stalls could be observed within blk_io_schedule. The time cost of
> the data from block device to RAM is counted here.
Yes, that is on purpose. The time a thread waits for swap read IO is
time in which the thread is not productive due to a lack of memory.
For async-submitted IO, this happens in lock_page() called from
do_swap_page(). If the submitting thread directly waits after the
submit_bio(), then that should be accounted too.
This patch doesn't make sense to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists