From: Martin Hicks <mort@sgi.com>
To: Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Ray Bryant <raybry@engr.sgi.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] VM: Automatic page cache reclaim (take 3)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:22:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050601142229.GS14894@localhost> (raw)
Hi,
Here's the next round of these patches. These are totally different in
an attempt to meet the "simpler" request after the last patches. For
reference the earlier threads are:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110839604924587&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-mm&m=111461480721249&w=2
This set of patches replaces my other vm- patches that are currently in
-mm. So they're against 2.6.12-rc5-mm1 about half way through the -mm
patchset.
As I said already this patch is a lot simpler. The reclaim is turned on
or off on a per-zone basis using a syscall. I haven't tested the x86
syscall, so it might be wrong. It uses the existing reclaim/pageout
code with the small addition of a may_swap flag to scan_control
(patch 1/4).
I also added __GFP_NORECLAIM (patch 3/4) so that certain allocation
types can be flagged to never cause reclaim. This was a deficiency
that was in all of my earlier patch sets. Previously, doing a big
buffered read would fill one zone with page cache and then start to
reclaim from that same zone, leaving the other zones untouched.
Adding some extra throttling on the reclaim was also required (patch
4/4). Without the machine would grind to a crawl when doing a "make -j"
kernel build. Even with this patch the System Time is higher on
average, but it seems tolerable. Here are some numbers for kernbench
runs on a 2-node, 4cpu, 8Gig RAM Altix in the "make -j" run:
wall user sys %cpu ctx sw. sleeps
---- ---- --- ---- ------ ------
No patch 1009 1384 847 258 298170 504402
w/patch, no reclaim 880 1376 667 288 254064 396745
w/patch & reclaim 1079 1385 926 252 291625 548873
These numbers are the average of 2 runs of 3 "make -j" runs done right
after system boot. Run-to-run variability for "make -j" is huge, so
these numbers aren't terribly useful except to seee that with reclaim
the benchmark still finishes in a reasonable amount of time.
I also looked at the NUMA hit/miss stats for the "make -j" runs and the
reclaim doesn't make any difference when the machine is thrashing away.
Doing a "make -j8" on a single node that is filled with page cache pages
takes 700 seconds with reclaim turned on and 735 seconds without reclaim
(due to remote memory accesses).
The simple zone_reclaim syscall program is at
http://www.bork.org/~mort/sgi/zone_reclaim.c
Please test or comment!
mh
--
Martin Hicks || Silicon Graphics Inc. || mort@sgi.com
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>
reply other threads:[~2005-06-01 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20050601142229.GS14894@localhost \
--to=mort@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=raybry@engr.sgi.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