From: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
Cc: sj@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, damon@lists.linux.dev,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
minchan@kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: madvise: pageout: ignore references rather than clearing young
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2024 11:02:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240224190255.45616-1-sj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240223041550.77157-1-21cnbao@gmail.com>
On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 17:15:50 +1300 Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
>
> While doing MADV_PAGEOUT, the current code will clear PTE young
> so that vmscan won't read young flags to allow the reclamation
> of madvised folios to go ahead.
> It seems we can do it by directly ignoring references, thus we
> can remove tlb flush in madvise and rmap overhead in vmscan.
>
> Regarding the side effect, in the original code, if a parallel
> thread runs side by side to access the madvised memory with the
> thread doing madvise, folios will get a chance to be re-activated
> by vmscan. But with the patch, they will still be reclaimed. But
> this behaviour doing PAGEOUT and doing access at the same time is
> quite silly like DoS. So probably, we don't need to care.
I think we might need to take care of the case, since users may use just a
best-effort estimation like DAMON for the target pages. In such cases, the
page granularity re-check of the access could be helpful. So I concern if this
could be a visible behavioral change for some valid use cases.
>
> A microbench as below has shown 6% decrement on the latency of
> MADV_PAGEOUT,
I assume some of the users may use MADV_PAGEOUT for proactive reclamation of
the memory. In the use case, I think latency of MADV_PAGEOUT might be not that
important.
Hence I think the cons of the behavioral change might outweigh the pros of the
latench improvement, for such best-effort proactive reclamation use case. Hope
to hear and learn from others' opinions.
>
> #define PGSIZE 4096
> main()
> {
> int i;
> #define SIZE 512*1024*1024
> volatile long *p = mmap(NULL, SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
>
> for (i = 0; i < SIZE/sizeof(long); i += PGSIZE / sizeof(long))
> p[i] = 0x11;
>
> madvise(p, SIZE, MADV_PAGEOUT);
> }
>
> w/o patch w/ patch
> root@10:~# time ./a.out root@10:~# time ./a.out
> real 0m49.634s real 0m46.334s
> user 0m0.637s user 0m0.648s
> sys 0m47.434s sys 0m44.265s
>
> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
Thanks,
SJ
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-24 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-23 4:15 Barry Song
2024-02-23 22:09 ` Minchan Kim
2024-02-23 22:20 ` Barry Song
2024-02-23 23:24 ` Minchan Kim
2024-02-24 4:37 ` Barry Song
2024-02-24 19:07 ` SeongJae Park
2024-02-24 20:01 ` Barry Song
2024-02-24 20:54 ` SeongJae Park
2024-02-24 21:54 ` Barry Song
2024-02-24 20:12 ` SeongJae Park
2024-02-24 20:33 ` Barry Song
2024-02-24 21:02 ` SeongJae Park
2024-02-24 19:02 ` SeongJae Park [this message]
2024-02-24 19:50 ` Barry Song
2024-02-24 20:02 ` SeongJae Park
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=20240224190255.45616-1-sj@kernel.org \
--to=sj@kernel.org \
--cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=damon@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.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