From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx114.postini.com [74.125.245.114]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A74A6B0044 for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2012 07:25:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <50910A99.5050707@leemhuis.info> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:25:13 +0100 From: Thorsten Leemhuis MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: kswapd0: excessive CPU usage References: <5076E700.2030909@suse.cz> <118079.1349978211@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <50770905.5070904@suse.cz> <119175.1349979570@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <5077434D.7080008@suse.cz> <50780F26.7070007@suse.cz> <20121012135726.GY29125@suse.de> <507BDD45.1070705@suse.cz> <20121015110937.GE29125@suse.de> <508E5FD3.1060105@leemhuis.info> <20121030191843.GH3888@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20121030191843.GH3888@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Jiri Slaby , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Jiri Slaby , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Andrew Morton On 30.10.2012 20:18, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:52:03AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 15.10.2012 13:09, Mel Gorman wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:54:13AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>>> On 10/12/2012 03:57 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: >>>>> mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim >>>>> Jiri Slaby reported the following: > [...] >>>> Yes, applying this instead of the revert fixes the issue as well. >> Just wondering, is there a reason why this patch wasn't applied to >> mainline? Did it simply fall through the cracks? Or am I missing >> something? > It's because a problem was reported related to the patch (off-list, > whoops). I'm waiting to hear if a second patch fixes the problem or not. Anything in particular I should look out for while testing? >> I'm asking because I think I stil see the issue on >> 3.7-rc2-git-checkout-from-friday. Seems Fedora rawhide users are >> hitting it, too: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866988 > I like the steps to reproduce. One of those cases where the bugzilla bug template was not very helpful or where it was not used as intended (you decide) :-) > Is step 3 profit? Yes, but psst, don't tell anyone; step 4 (world domination! for real!) is also hidden to keep that part of the big plan a secret for now ;-) >> Or are we seeing something different which just looks similar? I can >> test the patch if it needs further testing, but from the discussion >> I got the impression that everything is clear and the patch ready >> for merging. > It could be the same issue. Can you test with the "mm: vmscan: scale > number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim" > patch and the following on top please? Built a vanilla mainline kernel with those two patches and installed it on the machine where I was seeing problems high kswapd0 load on 3.7-rc3. Ran it an hour yesterday and a few hours today; seems the patches fix the issue for me as kswapd behaves: $ LC_ALL=C ps -aux | grep 'kswapd' root 62 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Oct30 0:05 [kswapd0] So everything is looking fine again so far thx to the two patches -- hopefully it stays that way even after hitting "send" in my mailer in a few seconds. CU knurd -- 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: email@kvack.org