From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Kuo-Hsin Yang <vovoy@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm, drm/i915: mark pinned shmemfs pages as unevictable
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 15:24:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181031142458.GP32673@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181031081945.207709-1-vovoy@chromium.org>
On Wed 31-10-18 16:19:45, Kuo-Hsin Yang wrote:
[...]
> The previous mapping_set_unevictable patch is worse on gem_syslatency
> because it defers to vmscan to move these pages to the unevictable list
> and the test measures latency to allocate 2MiB pages. This performance
> impact can be solved by explicit moving pages to the unevictable list in
> the i915 function.
As I've mentioned in the previous version and testing results. Are you
sure that the lazy unevictable pages collecting is the real problem
here? The test case was generating a lot of page cache and we simply do
not reclaim anon LRUs at all. Maybe I have misunderstood the test
though. I am also wondering whether unevictable pages culling can be
really visible when we do the anon LRU reclaim because the swap path is
quite expensinve on its own.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-31 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-31 8:19 Kuo-Hsin Yang
2018-10-31 9:41 ` Chris Wilson
2018-10-31 10:42 ` Vovo Yang
2018-11-01 12:20 ` Chris Wilson
2018-10-31 14:19 ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-01 12:06 ` Vovo Yang
2018-11-01 14:30 ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-02 13:22 ` Vovo Yang
2018-11-02 14:05 ` Dave Hansen
2018-11-05 11:24 ` Kuo-Hsin Yang
2018-10-31 14:24 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-10-31 14:40 ` Dave Hansen
2018-10-31 16:42 ` Michal Hocko
2018-11-01 11:28 ` Vovo Yang
2018-11-01 13:09 ` Michal Hocko
2018-11-02 12:35 ` Vovo Yang
2018-11-02 18:26 ` Michal Hocko
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=20181031142458.GP32673@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vovoy@chromium.org \
/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