[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALvZod5YGVSTvsg25P6goqyGEY21eVnahsXcs2BGsp6OXxLwsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:09:01 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] memcg: increase MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH to 64
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 3:47 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
>
[...]
>
> > To evaluate the impact of this optimization, on a 72 CPUs machine, we
> > ran the following workload in a three level of cgroup hierarchy with top
> > level having min and low setup appropriately. More specifically
> > memory.min equal to size of netperf binary and memory.low double of
> > that.
>
> a similar feedback to the test case description as with other patches.
What more info should I add to the description? Why did I set up min
and low or something else?
> >
> > $ netserver -6
> > # 36 instances of netperf with following params
> > $ netperf -6 -H ::1 -l 60 -t TCP_SENDFILE -- -m 10K
> >
> > Results (average throughput of netperf):
> > Without (6.0-rc1) 10482.7 Mbps
> > With patch 17064.7 Mbps (62.7% improvement)
> >
> > With the patch, the throughput improved by 62.7%.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
>
> Anyway
> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists