linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages in a zone
Date: Thu,  9 Jul 2009 16:01:26 +0900 (JST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090709121647.2395.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090709030731.GA17097@localhost>

Hi

> I tried the semaphore based concurrent direct reclaim throttling, and
> get these numbers. The run time is normal 30s, but can sometimes go up
> by many folds. It seems that there are more hidden problems..

Hmm....
I think I and you have different priority list. May I explain why Rik
and decide to use half of LRU pages?

the system have 4GB (=1M pages) memory. my patch allow 1M/2/32=16384
threads. I agree this is very large and inefficient. However IOW 
this is very conservative.
I believe it don't makes too strong restriction problem.

In the other hand, your patch's concurrent restriction is small constant
value (=32).
it can be more efficient and it also can makes regression. IOW it is more
aggressive approach.

e.g.
if the system have >100 CPU, my patch can get enough much reclaimer but
your patch makes tons idle cpus.


And, To recall original issue tearch us this is rarely and a bit insane
workload issue.
Then, I priotize to

1. prevent unnecessary OOM
2. no regression to typical workload
3. msgctl11 performance


IOW, I don't think msgctl11 performance is so important.
May I ask why do you think msgctl11 performance is so important?


>
> --- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1042,6 +1042,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  	unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
>  	struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = get_reclaim_stat(zone, sc);
>  	int lumpy_reclaim = 0;
> +	static struct semaphore direct_reclaim_sem = __SEMAPHORE_INITIALIZER(direct_reclaim_sem, 32);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * If we need a large contiguous chunk of memory, or have
> @@ -1057,6 +1058,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  
>  	pagevec_init(&pvec, 1);
>  
> +	if (!current_is_kswapd())
> +		down(&direct_reclaim_sem);
> +
>  	lru_add_drain();
>  	spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
>  	do {
> @@ -1173,6 +1177,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_inactive_lis
>  done:
>  	local_irq_enable();
>  	pagevec_release(&pvec);
> +
> +	if (!current_is_kswapd())
> +		up(&direct_reclaim_sem);
> +
>  	return nr_reclaimed;
>  }





--
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:[~2009-07-09  6:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-07  9:40 [RFC PATCH 0/2] fix unnecessary accidental OOM problem on concurrent reclaim KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07  9:47 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 13:23   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-07 18:59   ` Rik van Riel
2009-07-08  3:19     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09  1:51       ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages in a zone Rik van Riel
2009-07-09  2:47         ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09  3:07           ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09  7:01             ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2009-07-09  8:42               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-07-09 11:07                 ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09  6:39         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 23:39   ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] vmscan don't isolate too many pages Minchan Kim
2009-07-09  3:12     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07  9:48 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] Don't continue reclaim if the system have plenty free memory KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-07 13:20   ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-09  5:08     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-09 10:58       ` Minchan Kim
2009-07-13  0:37         ` KOSAKI Motohiro

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=20090709121647.2395.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --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