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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 5E27DC433E1 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 05:35:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 283AB20684 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 05:35:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 283AB20684 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 7E48E8D0009; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 01:35:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 795E88D0001; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 01:35:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 6AB368D0009; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 01:35:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0071.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541B78D0001 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 01:35:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D862BA775 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 05:35:21 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77046454842.28.land86_5201adf26f08 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin28.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A578EFDC for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 05:34:30 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: land86_5201adf26f08 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2939 Received: from out30-131.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-131.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.131]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 05:32:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R191e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01f04427;MF=alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=18;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0U2ysVL5_1594963521; Received: from IT-FVFX43SYHV2H.local(mailfrom:alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0U2ysVL5_1594963521) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 13:25:23 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 00/22] per memcg lru_lock To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Tejun Heo , Hugh Dickins , Konstantin Khlebnikov , Daniel Jordan , Yang Shi , Matthew Wilcox , Johannes Weiner , kbuild test robot , linux-mm , LKML , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Shakeel Butt , Joonsoo Kim , Wei Yang , "Kirill A. Shutemov" References: <1594429136-20002-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> From: Alex Shi Message-ID: <57c619e7-da7e-198e-3de8-530bf19b9450@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 13:24:28 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7A578EFDC X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: =E5=9C=A8 2020/7/16 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8810:11, Alexander Duyck =E5=86=99=E9= =81=93: >> Thanks for Testing support from Intel 0day and Rong Chen, Fengguang Wu= , >> and Yun Wang. Hugh Dickins also shared his kbuild-swap case. Thanks! > Hi Alex, >=20 > I think I am seeing a regression with this patch set when I run the > will-it-scale/page_fault3 test. Specifically the processes result is > dropping from 56371083 to 43127382 when I apply these patches. >=20 > I haven't had a chance to bisect and figure out what is causing it, > and wanted to let you know in case you are aware of anything specific > that may be causing this. Thanks a lot for the info! Actually, the patch 17th, and patch 13th may changed performance a little= , like the 17th, intel LKP found vm-scalability.throughput 68.0% improvemen= t, and stress-ng.remap.ops_per_sec -76.3% regression, or stress-ng.memfd.ops= _per_sec +23.2%. etc. This kind performance interference is known and acceptable. Thanks Alex =20