From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jianyue Wu <wujianyue000@gmail.com>
Cc: shakeel.butt@linux.dev, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: optimize stat output for 11% sys time reduce
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:13:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260122091351.0cc1afd5d419fafa1d98b32f@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260122114242.72139-1-wujianyue000@gmail.com>
On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 19:42:42 +0800 Jianyue Wu <wujianyue000@gmail.com> wrote:
> Replace seq_printf/seq_buf_printf with lightweight helpers to avoid
> printf parsing in memcg stats output.
>
> Key changes:
> - Add memcg_seq_put_name_val() for seq_file "name value\n" formatting
> - Add memcg_seq_buf_put_name_val() for seq_buf "name value\n" formatting
> - Update __memory_events_show(), swap_events_show(),
> memory_stat_format(), memory_numa_stat_show(), and related helpers
> - Introduce local variables to improve readability and reduce line length
>
> Performance:
> - 1M reads of memory.stat+memory.numa_stat
> - Before: real 0m9.663s, user 0m4.840s, sys 0m4.823s
> - After: real 0m9.051s, user 0m4.775s, sys 0m4.275s (~11.4% sys drop)
So the tl;dr here is "vfprintf() is slow".
It's quite a large change, although not a complex one.
Do we need to change so much? Would some subset of these changes
provide most of the benefit?
It does rather uglify things so there's a risk that helpful people will
send "cleanups" which switch back to using *printf*. Explanatory code
comments would help prevent that but we'd need a lot of them.
I dunno, what do people think? Does the benefit justify the change?
> Tests:
> - Script:
> for ((i=1; i<=1000000; i++)); do
> : > /dev/null < /sys/fs/cgroup/memory.stat
> : > /dev/null < /sys/fs/cgroup/memory.numa_stat
> done
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-22 17:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-08 9:37 [PATCH] " Jianyue Wu
2026-01-08 19:10 ` Andrew Morton
2026-01-08 22:49 ` Roman Gushchin
2026-01-08 23:52 ` Jiany Wu
2026-01-08 23:56 ` Jiany Wu
2026-01-10 4:22 ` [PATCH v2] " Jianyue Wu
2026-01-10 23:33 ` Andrew Morton
2026-01-11 4:37 ` Jianyue Wu
2026-01-13 0:23 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-01-13 0:29 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-01-22 11:42 ` [PATCH v3] " Jianyue Wu
2026-01-22 17:13 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-01-22 21:12 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-01-23 1:07 ` Jianyue Wu
2026-01-23 8:14 ` JP Kobryn
2026-01-23 13:24 ` Jianyue Wu
2026-01-23 15:01 ` [PATCH v4 0/1] mm: memcg: optimize stat output to reduce printf overhead Jianyue Wu
2026-01-23 15:01 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] mm: optimize stat output for 11% sys time reduce Jianyue Wu
2026-01-23 15:06 ` Jianyue Wu
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=20260122091351.0cc1afd5d419fafa1d98b32f@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=wujianyue000@gmail.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