linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,  <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<akpm@linux-foundation.org>,  <yuzhao@google.com>,
	<ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] lru: allow large batched add large folio to lru list
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 14:39:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871qkhvgme.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dfe4c794-4ae4-0e3a-ba0c-8b480471617e@intel.com> (Yin Fengwei's message of "Tue, 18 Apr 2023 10:37:07 +0800")

Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com> writes:

> Add Ying who found out the large folio is not batched added to lru.

Thanks!

> On 4/18/23 09:57, Yin Fengwei wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/17/23 20:25, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 03:56:43PM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
>>>> Currently, large folio is not batched added to lru list. Which
>>>> cause high lru lock contention after enable large folio for
>>>> anonymous mappping.
>>>
>>> Obviously, I think we should be doing a batched add, but I don't think
>>> this is right.
>>>
>>>> @@ -54,7 +57,12 @@ static inline unsigned pagevec_space(struct pagevec *pvec)
>>>>  static inline unsigned pagevec_add(struct pagevec *pvec, struct page *page)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	pvec->pages[pvec->nr++] = page;
>>>> -	return pagevec_space(pvec);
>>>> +	pvec->pages_nr += compound_nr(page);
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (pvec->pages_nr > PAGEVEC_SIZE)

nr_pages appears better for me.

>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +	else
>>>> +		return pagevec_space(pvec);
>>>
>>> I assume your thinking here is that we should limit the number of pages
>>> in the batches, but I think we should allow the number of folios to reach
>>> PAGEVEC_SIZE before we drain the batch onto the LRU list.  That will
>>> reduce the contention on the LRU lock even further.
>> 
>> Yes. The first thought in my mind was to limit the number of folios also.
>> 
>> But the concern is that large folio has wider range of size. In the extreme
>> case, if all batched large folios has 2M size, with PAGEVEC_SIZE as 15,
>> one batch could have 30M memory. Which could be too large for some usages.

Yes.  I think that these are valid concerns.  One possibility to balance
between performance and lru cache size is to make nr_pages of per-CPU
lru cache < PAGEVEC_SIZE * N.  Where N can be determined according to
the intended base order of large folios.  For example, it can be 4 if we
use 2 as intended base order.

Just my 2 cents.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying


  reply	other threads:[~2023-04-18  6:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-17  7:56 [PATCH 0/2] Reduce lock contention related with large folio Yin Fengwei
2023-04-17  7:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] THP: avoid lock when check whether THP is in deferred list Yin Fengwei
2023-04-17  7:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] lru: allow large batched add large folio to lru list Yin Fengwei
2023-04-17 12:25   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-04-18  1:57     ` Yin Fengwei
2023-04-18  2:37       ` Yin Fengwei
2023-04-18  6:39         ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2023-04-17 10:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] Reduce lock contention related with large folio Ryan Roberts

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=871qkhvgme.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yuzhao@google.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