From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 24FDB6B008A for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n7CGJAjR027440 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:10 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C55D545DE57 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9341945DE53 for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7651DB805D for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml10.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml10.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.100]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17105E1800E for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:09 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <5de2e6e6dafe61357de744c749e24a46.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <4A829F1B.4060205@redhat.com> References: <20090811144405.GW7176@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090811163159.ddc5f5fd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090812045716.GH7176@balbir.in.ibm.com> <4A829F1B.4060205@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:19:08 +0900 (JST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Help Resource Counters Scale better (v4.1) From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Prarit Bhargava Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, menage@google.com, andi.kleen@intel.com, xemul@openvz.org, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Prarit Bhargava さんは書きました： > > > Balbir Singh wrote: >> Hi, Andrew, >> >> Does this look better, could you please replace the older patch with >> this one. >> >> 1. I did a quick compile test >> 2. Ran scripts/checkpatch.pl >> >> >> > > Andi Kleen suggested I use kernbench to profile the kernel. > > 2.6.31-rc5-git2 w/ CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS on > > Tue Aug 11 13:45:14 EDT 2009 > 2.6.31-rc5-git2-resources > Average Half load -j 32 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 622.588 (119.243) > User Time 4820.8 (962.286) > System Time 9807.63 (2669.55) > Percent CPU 2324 (167.236) > Context Switches 2009606 (368703) > Sleeps 1.24949e+06 (118210) > > Average Optimal load -j 256 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 770.97 (90.8685) > User Time 5068.42 (750.933) > System Time 21499.8 (12822.3) > Percent CPU 3660 (1425.28) > Context Switches 2.86467e+06 (971764) > Sleeps 1.32784e+06 (129048) > > Average Maximal load -j Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 757.018 (22.8371) > User Time 4958.85 (644.65) > System Time 24916.5 (11454.3) > Percent CPU 4046.93 (1279.6) > Context Switches 3.04894e+06 (826687) > Sleeps 1.26053e+06 (146073) > > > 2.6.31-rc5-git2 w/ CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS off > > Tue Aug 11 17:58:58 EDT 2009 > 2.6.31-rc5-git2-no-resources > Average Half load -j 32 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 280.176 (21.1131) > User Time 3558.51 (389.488) > System Time 2393.87 (142.692) > Percent CPU 2122.6 (50.5104) > Context Switches 1.20474e+06 (131112) > Sleeps 1062507 (59366.3) > > Average Optimal load -j 256 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 223.192 (42.7007) > User Time 4243.19 (967.575) > System Time 2649.57 (344.462) > Percent CPU 2845.5 (856.217) > Context Switches 1.52187e+06 (391821) > Sleeps 1.28862e+06 (274222) > > Average Maximal load -j Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 216.942 (45.4824) > User Time 3860.46 (966.452) > System Time 2782.17 (344.154) > Percent CPU 2862.47 (720.904) > Context Switches 1.43379e+06 (341021) > Sleeps 1184325 (269392) > > 2.6.31-rc5-git2 w/ CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS on + patch > > Tue Aug 11 20:58:31 EDT 2009 > 2.6.31-rc5-git2-mem-patch > Average Half load -j 32 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 285.788 (18.577) > User Time 3483.14 (346.56) > System Time 2426.37 (132.015) > Percent CPU 2066.8 (80.3754) > Context Switches 1.16588e+06 (134701) > Sleeps 1048810 (59891.2) > > Average Optimal load -j 256 Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 239.81 (14.0759) > User Time 3797.7 (422.118) > System Time 2622.74 (225.361) > Percent CPU 2480.9 (446.735) > Context Switches 1.37301e+06 (238886) > Sleeps 1195957 (161659) > > Average Maximal load -j Run (std deviation): > Elapsed Time 203.884 (8.59151) > User Time 3578.02 (482.79) > System Time 2759.9 (273.03) > Percent CPU 2663.53 (450.476) > Context Switches 1.33907e+06 (199658) > Sleeps 1119205 (172089) > > > ... The odd thing is that the run with the patch is still less than the > run with CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTERS off. It was so odd that I double > checked that I actually built in RESOURCE_COUNTERS and had applied the > patch, both of which I had done. > Hmm, CONFIG_RESOURCE_COUNTER actually means CONFIG_MEM_CGROUP ? Then, more requests from me. (if you can) Apply patch and set config ON. plz check your bench in following cases. 1. boot with cgroup_disable=memory (will have the same effect as config=off) boot without above option...and 2. Run your bench without mount memcg. 3. Run your bench with memcg...as... #mount -tcgroup none /cgroups -omemory #mkdir /cgroups/test #echo $$ > /cgroups/test #kernbench. Thanks, -Kame > P. > -- 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