linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] the proposal of improve page reclaim by throttle
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:34:59 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200802191735.00222.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080219134715.7E90.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Tuesday 19 February 2008 16:44, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> background
> ========================================
> current VM implementation doesn't has limit of # of parallel reclaim.
> when heavy workload, it bring to 2 bad things
>   - heavy lock contention
>   - unnecessary swap out
>
> abount 2 month ago, KAMEZA Hiroyuki proposed the patch of page
> reclaim throttle and explain it improve reclaim time.
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=119667465917215&w=2
>
> but unfortunately it works only memcgroup reclaim.
> Today, I implement it again for support global reclaim and mesure it.
>
>
> test machine, method and result
> ==================================================
> <test machine>
> 	CPU:  IA64 x8
> 	MEM:  8GB
> 	SWAP: 2GB
>
> <test method>
> 	got hackbench from
> 		http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/hackbench.c
>
> 	$ /usr/bin/time hackbench 120 process 1000
>
> 	this parameter mean consume all physical memory and
> 	1GB swap space on my test environment.
>
> <test result (average of 3 times measurement)>
>
> before:
> 	hackbench result:		282.30
> 	/usr/bin/time result
> 		user:			14.16
> 		sys:			1248.47
> 		elapse:			432.93
> 		major fault:		29026
> 	max parallel reclaim tasks:	1298
> 	max consumption time of
> 	 try_to_free_pages():		70394
>
> after:
> 	hackbench result:		30.36
> 	/usr/bin/time result
> 		user:			14.26
> 		sys:			294.44
> 		elapse:			118.01
> 		major fault:		3064
> 	max parallel reclaim tasks:	4
> 	max consumption time of
> 	 try_to_free_pages():		12234
>
>
> conclusion
> =========================================
> this patch improve 3 things.
> 1. reduce unnecessary swap
>    (see above major fault. about 90% reduced)
> 2. improve throughput performance
>    (see above hackbench result. about 90% reduced)
> 3. improve interactive performance.
>    (see above max consumption of try_to_free_pages.
>     about 80% reduced)
> 4. reduce lock contention.
>    (see above sys time. about 80% reduced)
>
>
> Now, we got about 1000% performance improvement of hackbench :)
>
>
>
> foture works
> ==========================================================
>  - more discussion with memory controller guys.

Hi,

Yeah this is definitely needed and a nice result.

I'm worried about a) placing a global limit on parallelism, and b)
placing a limit on parallelism at all.

I think it should maybe be a per-zone thing...

What happens if you make it a per-zone mutex, and allow just a single
process to reclaim pages from a given zone at a time? I guess that is
going to slow down throughput a little bit in some cases though...

--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2008-02-19  6:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-02-19  5:44 KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-19  6:34 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2008-02-19  7:09   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-19 13:31   ` Rik van Riel
2008-02-20  8:56 ` minchan Kim
2008-02-20  9:24   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-20  9:49     ` minchan Kim
2008-02-20 10:09       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-21  9:38         ` minchan Kim
2008-02-21 10:55           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-21 12:29             ` minchan Kim
2008-02-21 12:41               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-21  9:48 ` Balbir Singh
2008-02-21 11:01   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-21 11:02     ` Balbir Singh

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=200802191735.00222.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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