From: "Sung-hun Kim" <sfoon.kim@samsung.com>
To: "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<sungguk.na@samsung.com>, <sw0312.kim@samsung.com>,
<sebuns@gmail.com>, "'Stefan Roesch'" <shr@devkernel.io>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] mm: ksm: Consider the number of ksm_mm_slot in the general_profit calculation
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 14:25:53 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0fe601dad352$cca07de0$65e179a0$@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240620134752.9a63c12403282c0c7e728764@linux-foundation.org>
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 13:39:14 +0900 Sung-hun Kim <sfoon.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> > The current version of KSM does not take into account the number of
> > used ksm_mm_slot. Therefore, when users want to obtain profits of KSM,
> > KSM omits the memory used for allocating ksm_mm_slots.
> >
> > This patch introduces a new variable to keep track of the number of
> > allocated ksm_mm_slots. By doing so, KSM will be able to provide a
> > more accurate number of the gains made.
> >
>
> By how much does the improve the accuracy? In other words, how much difference does this make?
>
I think it makes only small difference. (few kilobytes for hundreds of processes)
> > @@ -3672,7 +3680,8 @@ static ssize_t general_profit_show(struct kobject *kobj,
> > long general_profit;
> >
> > general_profit = (ksm_pages_sharing + atomic_long_read(&ksm_zero_pages)) * PAGE_SIZE -
> > - ksm_rmap_items * sizeof(struct ksm_rmap_item);
> > + ksm_rmap_items * sizeof(struct ksm_rmap_item) -
> > + atomic_long_read(&ksm_mm_slots) * sizeof(struct ksm_mm_slot);
> >
> > return sysfs_emit(buf, "%ld\n", general_profit);
>
> This assumes perfect slab packing, no? Should it use ksize()?
Ah, thanks for your recommendation. It should be fixed.
Best regards,
Sung-hun Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-11 5:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20240620043920epcas1p1b57dce789304aa96fd83e5b2b194d244@epcas1p1.samsung.com>
2024-06-20 4:39 ` Sung-hun Kim
2024-06-20 19:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-06-21 2:30 ` Chengming Zhou
2024-07-11 5:19 ` Sung-hun Kim
2024-07-11 6:32 ` Chengming Zhou
2024-06-20 20:47 ` Andrew Morton
2024-07-11 5:25 ` Sung-hun Kim [this message]
2024-07-11 6:10 ` Sung-hun Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='0fe601dad352$cca07de0$65e179a0$@samsung.com' \
--to=sfoon.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sebuns@gmail.com \
--cc=shr@devkernel.io \
--cc=sungguk.na@samsung.com \
--cc=sw0312.kim@samsung.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox