From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v7)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:19:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100315171921.GJ21127@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100315171209.GI21127@redhat.com>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 01:12:09PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:26:37AM +0100, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > Control the maximum amount of dirty pages a cgroup can have at any given time.
> >
> > Per cgroup dirty limit is like fixing the max amount of dirty (hard to reclaim)
> > page cache used by any cgroup. So, in case of multiple cgroup writers, they
> > will not be able to consume more than their designated share of dirty pages and
> > will be forced to perform write-out if they cross that limit.
> >
>
> For me even with this version I see that group with 100M limit is getting
> much more BW.
>
> root cgroup
> ==========
> #time dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/zerofile bs=4K count=1M
> 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 55.7979 s, 77.0 MB/s
>
> real 0m56.209s
>
> test1 cgroup with memory limit of 100M
> ======================================
> # time dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/zerofile1 bs=4K count=1M
> 4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 20.9252 s, 205 MB/s
>
> real 0m21.096s
>
> Note, these two jobs are not running in parallel. These are running one
> after the other.
>
Ok, here is the strange part. I am seeing similar behavior even without
your patches applied.
root cgroup
==========
#time dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/zerofile bs=4K count=1M
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 56.098 s, 76.6 MB/s
real 0m56.614s
test1 cgroup with memory limit 100M
===================================
# time dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/zerofile1 bs=4K count=1M
4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB) copied, 19.8097 s, 217 MB/s
real 0m19.992s
Vivek
>
> > The overall design is the following:
> >
> > - account dirty pages per cgroup
> > - limit the number of dirty pages via memory.dirty_ratio / memory.dirty_bytes
> > and memory.dirty_background_ratio / memory.dirty_background_bytes in
> > cgroupfs
> > - start to write-out (background or actively) when the cgroup limits are
> > exceeded
> >
> > This feature is supposed to be strictly connected to any underlying IO
> > controller implementation, so we can stop increasing dirty pages in VM layer
> > and enforce a write-out before any cgroup will consume the global amount of
> > dirty pages defined by the /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio|dirty_bytes and
> > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio|dirty_background_bytes limits.
> >
> > Changelog (v6 -> v7)
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > * introduce trylock_page_cgroup() to guarantee that lock_page_cgroup()
> > is never called under tree_lock (no strict accounting, but better overall
> > performance)
> > * do not account file cache statistics for the root cgroup (zero
> > overhead for the root cgroup)
> > * fix: evaluate cgroup free pages as at the minimum free pages of all
> > its parents
> >
> > Results
> > ~~~~~~~
> > The testcase is a kernel build (2.6.33 x86_64_defconfig) on a Intel Core 2 @
> > 1.2GHz:
> >
> > <before>
> > - root cgroup: 11m51.983s
> > - child cgroup: 11m56.596s
> >
> > <after>
> > - root cgroup: 11m51.742s
> > - child cgroup: 12m5.016s
> >
> > In the previous version of this patchset, using the "complex" locking scheme
> > with the _locked and _unlocked version of mem_cgroup_update_page_stat(), the
> > child cgroup required 11m57.896s and 12m9.920s with lock_page_cgroup()+irq_disabled.
> >
> > With this version there's no overhead for the root cgroup (the small difference
> > is in error range). I expected to see less overhead for the child cgroup, I'll
> > do more testing and try to figure better what's happening.
> >
> > In the while, it would be great if someone could perform some tests on a larger
> > system... unfortunately at the moment I don't have a big system available for
> > this kind of tests...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Andrea
> >
> > Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt | 36 +++
> > fs/nfs/write.c | 4 +
> > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 87 ++++++-
> > include/linux/page_cgroup.h | 35 +++
> > include/linux/writeback.h | 2 -
> > mm/filemap.c | 1 +
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 542 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > mm/page-writeback.c | 215 ++++++++++------
> > mm/rmap.c | 4 +-
> > mm/truncate.c | 1 +
> > 10 files changed, 806 insertions(+), 121 deletions(-)
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-15 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-14 23:26 Andrea Righi
2010-03-14 23:26 ` [PATCH -mmotm 1/5] memcg: disable irq at page cgroup lock Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 0:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-15 10:00 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-17 7:04 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 11:58 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 23:54 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-18 0:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-18 2:16 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-18 2:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-18 5:12 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-18 4:19 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-18 4:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-18 6:25 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-18 4:35 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-18 16:28 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-19 1:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-19 2:40 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-19 3:00 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
[not found] ` <xr93hbnepmj6.fsf@ninji.mtv.corp.google.com>
2010-04-14 6:55 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-14 9:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 14:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-14 19:31 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-15 0:14 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 16:22 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-15 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 14:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-04-14 20:14 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-15 2:40 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-04-15 4:48 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-15 6:21 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-04-15 6:38 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-15 6:54 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-23 20:17 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-23 20:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-24 15:53 ` Greg Thelen
2010-04-23 20:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-24 2:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-23 21:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-24 2:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 14:44 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-14 23:26 ` [PATCH -mmotm 2/5] memcg: dirty memory documentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-16 7:41 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-17 17:48 ` Greg Thelen
2010-03-17 19:02 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 22:43 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-14 23:26 ` [PATCH -mmotm 3/5] page_cgroup: introduce file cache flags Andrea Righi
2010-03-14 23:26 ` [PATCH -mmotm 4/5] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 2:26 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-16 2:32 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-16 14:11 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-16 15:09 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-17 22:37 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-17 22:52 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-18 6:48 ` Greg Thelen
2010-03-14 23:26 ` [PATCH -mmotm 5/5] memcg: dirty pages instrumentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 2:31 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-15 2:36 ` [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v7) KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-15 10:02 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 17:12 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-15 17:19 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2010-03-17 11:54 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 13:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-17 18:53 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 19:15 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-17 19:17 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-17 19:48 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-17 6:44 ` 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=20100315171921.GJ21127@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arighi@develer.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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