[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57xfda6fbz6m4sig4kdyi5jinibcqycobwrpaih45cykfqyr5a@fstc2xjyw2x5>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 08:29:41 -0400
From: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
To: JaeJoon Jung <rgbi3307@...il.com>
Cc: maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] maple_tree: add mas_node_count() before going to
slow_path in mas_wr_modify()
* JaeJoon Jung <rgbi3307@...il.com> [240602 05:06]:
> Hello, Liam.
> Thank you very much for the detailed answer and explanation.
>
> I tested this patch in userspace.
> In user space, this phenomenon always occurs when kmem_cache_alloc()
> is executed to allocate a new node.
This is expected in the userspace test program. We test the error path
most frequently, with only a bypass for those who wish to test an
initial success - such as preallocations. I was concerned about the
testing since your first patch had a syntax error with a correction
quickly after. It is good news that you were able to find and use the
maple tree testing framework, though.
> I will try to test it in more detail in kernel space.
If you test in kernel space, you will have to hit a low memory scenario
to see a difference. stress-ng would probably help.
> I will also refer to the notes from the email list you shared
> and send results once a more clear analysis has been made.
I don't think you need to continue with this work as you will find that
the low memory situation is going to be rare and in a very slow path
already.
Thanks,
Liam
Powered by blists - more mailing lists