From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44629C3F2CF for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:57:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003C3246A0 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:57:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="eL50gsyw" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 003C3246A0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 5EA806B0005; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:57:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 599EF6B0006; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:57:37 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 489486B0007; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:57:37 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0199.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3152A6B0005 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:57:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2DD0181AEF09 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:57:36 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76538478954.08.scale01_426f64933f149 X-HE-Tag: scale01_426f64933f149 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5840 Received: from mail-pj1-f68.google.com (mail-pj1-f68.google.com [209.85.216.68]) by imf49.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 05:57:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f68.google.com with SMTP id m13so841718pjb.2 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:57:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=PDf9PnlhMTvp0FbKUb6+UsCf+ZaA2GDDl1RnDtBBeZI=; b=eL50gsywJG992MKjFCmOhRUCrYtWTUJmWmtxdrxt7mFqcVxrkNg0x3teOqBLzQdw3K VWPNrokcBU2GIYzIcY391LBG3t94oc2N/HJ6wKXB23vFR6SEElXcjgN5Bu3jhGSQl0jS 7Ac59+xZsCbE92qkMS60Rkpj+9aPanPdpUqe48G7UEL6oa1MdyA4xbMA7f62t2C7ePkS dmlwKGMQeDf7HnQn876QJ3MduAtceFwHqGhJrmAWWxAlGRJWKMDlENOixREQiVQPurqi M9e257tapsEG00bbWd34TdUwOhNe34pO0y8xf2LhOn+PvMmVD5RnSaG290fwcnbh9uN9 +z0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=PDf9PnlhMTvp0FbKUb6+UsCf+ZaA2GDDl1RnDtBBeZI=; b=SqmLCcUoY9LcKfug2i5d1bCAR9PyIf+sGigpPtyem7qKR/aww+SmjXWbFsMxCKUaND Ioac8kjtxn4MazB15+6YxP5/IxfiQNqLVYCavqHArPsa13WDQv7nUHRKhDNVEzQU5XFf h5f0mH+OBW77BSXjvlVSJ8oNIU3sCeXnU5r7csGKuISEQMTSpzDRHUtPJXwVCFobeswz Zv3H5hv2FR3UdEHReJnZkwgyOMhzB4ZRvq+P5YqfsOYru+IlLUncHfunB4CfunueGg4i o8z+AVQufd+L4wfceeg4PfpkX25hXV8S+otQOOfpnTnOTCsZKP8+QSAg4zuZa/etFRNK cl3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUunIRJG/Uie0dIcXrAMOzVIvDiJvZZHU2/hHADm1xzSvgm9coM X0ZYK6aHC33at9s+UkIzDjk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqznEUWY3wWS/MdUdidtwcMXN0RtzCh1PA1ZfTLGtjXyndHk5rUdxAz92kR3Zl9UYTjn8+sJbw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:be03:: with SMTP id a3mr2732066pjs.99.1582869455279; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:57:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain ([47.89.83.64]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d69sm10213247pfd.72.2020.02.27.21.57.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:57:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 13:57:26 +0800 From: Aaron Lu To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , Minchan Kim , Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , kernel-team@lge.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] workingset protection/detection on the anonymous LRU list Message-ID: <20200228055726.GA674737@ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain> References: <1582175513-22601-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <20200226193942.30049da9c090b466bdc5ec23@linux-foundation.org> <20200227134806.GC39625@cmpxchg.org> <20200228032358.GB634650@ziqianlu-desktop.localdomain> <20200228040214.GA21040@js1304-desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200228040214.GA21040@js1304-desktop> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:03:03PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 11:23:58AM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 08:48:06AM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 07:39:42PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > It sounds like the above simple aging changes provide most of the > > > > improvement, and that the workingset changes are less beneficial and a > > > > bit more risky/speculative? > > > > > > > > If so, would it be best for us to concentrate on the aging changes > > > > first, let that settle in and spread out and then turn attention to the > > > > workingset changes? > > > > > > Those two patches work well for some workloads (like the benchmark), > > > but not for others. The full patchset makes sure both types work well. > > > > > > Specifically, the existing aging strategy for anon assumes that most > > > anon pages allocated are hot. That's why they all start active and we > > > then do second-chance with the small inactive LRU to filter out the > > > few cold ones to swap out. This is true for many common workloads. > > > > > > The benchmark creates a larger-than-memory set of anon pages with a > > > flat access profile - to the VM a flood of one-off pages. Joonsoo's > > > > test: swap-w-rand-mt, which is a multi thread swap write intensive > > workload so there will be swap out and swap ins. > > > > > first two patches allow the VM to usher those pages in and out of > > > > Weird part is, the robot says the performance gain comes from the 1st > > patch only, which adjust the ratio, not including the 2nd patch which > > makes anon page starting from inactive list. > > > > I find the performance gain hard to explain... > > Let me explain the reason of the performance gain. > > 1st patch provides more second chance to the anonymous pages. By second chance, do I understand correctely this refers to pages on inactive list get moved back to active list? > In swap-w-rand-mt test, memory used by all threads is greater than the > amount of the system memory, but, memory used by each thread would > not be much. So, although it is a rand test, there is a locality > in each thread's job. More second chance helps to exploit this > locality so performance could be improved. Does this mean there should be fewer vmstat.pswpout and vmstat.pswpin with patch1 compared to vanilla? Thanks.