From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Ric Mason <ric.masonn@gmail.com>,
Simon Jeons <simon.jeons@gmail.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Make the batch size of the percpu_counter configurable
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 14:34:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130529143404.68feeed7a3e7934275220735@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369862412.27102.368.camel@schen9-DESK>
On Wed, 29 May 2013 14:20:12 -0700 Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Do we have any performance testing results? They're pretty important
> > for a performance-improvement patch ;)
> >
>
> I've done a repeated brk test of 800KB (from will-it-scale test suite)
> with 80 concurrent processes on a 4 socket Westmere machine with a
> total of 40 cores. Without the patch, about 80% of cpu is spent on
> spin-lock contention within the vm_committed_as counter. With the patch,
> there's a 73x speedup on the benchmark and the lock contention drops off
> almost entirely.
Only a 73x speedup? I dunno what they pay you for ;)
How serious is this performance problem in real-world work? For
something of this magnitude we might want to backport the patch into
earlier kernels (because most everyone who uses those kernels will be
doing this anyway). However such an act would require a pretty clear
explanation of the benefit which end-users will see.
--
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>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-29 21:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-03 10:10 Tim Chen
2013-05-03 10:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] Make batch size for memory accounting configured according to size of memory Tim Chen
2013-05-21 20:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] Make the batch size of the percpu_counter configurable Andrew Morton
2013-05-21 23:27 ` Tim Chen
2013-05-21 23:41 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-22 0:43 ` Tim Chen
2013-05-22 7:20 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-22 23:37 ` Tim Chen
2013-05-29 19:26 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-29 21:20 ` Tim Chen
2013-05-29 21:34 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
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=20130529143404.68feeed7a3e7934275220735@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ric.masonn@gmail.com \
--cc=simon.jeons@gmail.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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