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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87063E6B27C for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 13:39:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 217756B008C; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:39:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 1C7156B0095; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:39:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0DD4E6B0096; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:39:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53E16B008C for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:39:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95FBC1C622D for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 13:39:22 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82737631032.17.274B712 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30FD40018 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 13:38:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of stepanov.anatoly@huawei.com designates 185.176.79.56 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stepanov.anatoly@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1730468144; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hzj+NiwVHc70zP3ER8iF/LOOTK3GLaE8VcUCLcoXUNo=; b=zNMzhA6A2vQPhSO8UP7cGMw8nmzF2XFtHbDFD9mpRIH7RozbITf3OY06xclo5DvTUoVtx2 VYpPzlZ8FcNcUppd59j9wOFOrfyVGuEgcCRH1h3203KtSV40F3AaIyswsxr/4HWz44L7sq 4Uw1J+otenF1X46qhMyGUXHPgHbs5N8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of stepanov.anatoly@huawei.com designates 185.176.79.56 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stepanov.anatoly@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1730468144; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=PooE/5IqNo6HPaTgYYZAIAyStjCM1cYWzunPfjhd/RIGFLlrmNIIYwPC3NQJm09K5BwdPK KiUcqDjMVpsebZ8jiGzjyp1kRQFEZ02ijgWxZsau/4QSslruBtWytzIOOn9mFrj07okMir h9eVM+jPC7Km7EoRJnTA5uJkE7MGjog= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.31]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Xg1zp0lQYz6LD3y; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:34:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from mscpeml500003.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.188.49.51]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A46B140445; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 21:39:08 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.123.123.226] (10.123.123.226) by mscpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.188.49.51) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.34; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 16:39:07 +0300 Message-ID: <5baa6024-a0a4-4b0b-a7d1-641bba7e5b87@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 16:39:07 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Cgroup-based THP control To: Michal Hocko CC: Gutierrez Asier , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <80d76bad-41d8-4108-ad74-f891e5180e47@huawei.com> <274e1560-9f6c-4dd9-b27c-2fd0f0c54d03@huawei.com> <5120497d-d60a-4a4b-a39d-9b1dbe89154c@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stepanov Anatoly In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.123.123.226] X-ClientProxiedBy: mscpeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.188.26.250) To mscpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.188.49.51) X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D30FD40018 X-Stat-Signature: w3mt8f359nki34r8ei8wq18pgchwq3zh X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1730468323-242344 X-HE-Meta: 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 CPj2XlxV e1T34S67KZ+X7jV40dQ6/pokq7HXooPO7qlzE00dF5LA1zEa6de/mhql73qhYMiH+QHzqZriYEybcAD5FdfB0JQLtHE2gpQoQkh/jUa2XbAKfB3rZ8B2zEDwVgI2VgQvMvdbfP3+m2MUoNTfu9dJTgsMjOAW6njJpsCtWTchSIDI+J+I= 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 11/1/2024 4:28 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 01-11-24 16:24:55, Stepanov Anatoly wrote: >> On 11/1/2024 4:15 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Fri 01-11-24 14:54:27, Stepanov Anatoly wrote: >>>> On 11/1/2024 10:35 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>> On Thu 31-10-24 17:37:12, Stepanov Anatoly wrote: >>>>>> If we consider the inheritance approach (prctl + launcher), it's fine until we need to change >>>>>> THP mode property for several tasks at once, in this case some batch-change approach needed. >>>>> >>>>> I do not follow. How is this any different from a single process? Or do >>>>> you mean to change the mode for an already running process? >>>>> >>>> yes, for already running set of processes >>> >> >>> Why is that preferred over setting the policy upfront? >> Setting the policy in advance is fine, as the first step to do. >> But we might not know in advance >> which exact policy is the most beneficial for one set of apps or another. > > How do you plan to find that out when the application is running > already? For example, if someone willing to compare some DB server performance with THP-off vs THP-on, and DB server restart isn't an option. Of course, if the restart is ok then we don't need such feature, "launcher" approach would be enough. if i got your question right. -- Anatoly Stepanov, Huawei