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 62D1BEB64D7 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AD1D08E0002; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 02:54:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A81E98E0001; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 02:54:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 94A468E0002; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 02:54:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F1E8E0001 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 02:54:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F76160A59 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:51 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80907698382.06.371F2D9 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D38D40004 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=hybYbIEY; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of piyushs@linux.vnet.ibm.com has no SPF policy when checking 148.163.156.1) smtp.mailfrom=piyushs@linux.vnet.ibm.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1686898489; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=ylpp8rVbCG3anuIAyQa0P54lzsBpT7c9Zj+0rAXu3xQ=; b=MSiHx25cvwz0x504dZs3JU2zifuSRDQuMHCUg8muvuwtKDrOyYe+3SDAmj5w0cvmQYo/CW WGiXfY/CbwNIlWTkR7F3iwWkc3B1vv4yA4oQZ2+ffNNqKME4RNB1vxU7Z/zOF9A/NA6CYs eJrLKLTBDGoushqqNFvp2K3ZMYOG0K4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=hybYbIEY; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of piyushs@linux.vnet.ibm.com has no SPF policy when checking 148.163.156.1) smtp.mailfrom=piyushs@linux.vnet.ibm.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1686898489; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=1sw+I4L2orIVGp63Z//kLBbZxgtJwMlCP2OQiF5nu7tAYtvdBYS+v0i43vdnEv8AbQUKvU KpspFewNb12vBurhC746z8PPpW369K2XjfjUxZR+hxkCpvrVtJsqb+1Z7+IzvJZTZtM7GC g4lJaMwRc0+m5yWzZRMpYtBUjm7n4E4= Received: from pps.filterd (m0353727.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 35G6qYUn009415; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:42 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : content-type : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=ylpp8rVbCG3anuIAyQa0P54lzsBpT7c9Zj+0rAXu3xQ=; b=hybYbIEY9E3zgMiO9iDWZRDpRSWqddRF2KqERRThC8782/93fbQei7gZjAMmNAVspe4O L/q4hcLwXjOUbw9iskPfSJPlGmyZACEYULYZrKRYDuV1NcodqNEkGACengVcRvA7AmPk TVqYjLNU66K5GBRDU9DfO8RCsU0CCOMSNaFlHwAsQ4wCX3jsoedPMt+1kECw4D6XDfDk dImE+XgyLrBndAz+XzjQTaOoeTBC8u6uzgcwdiXOXu63tYixkW2DYZchFHtLn0nVuj8F iuKpFGalj37xG1uanzgTEMqf9K7TEIpGmf15DoIiyilO4L2MenlZddChlJqjM9CQ1KJ8 nw== Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3r8juu80v6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:41 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 35G6MaRu009776; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:39 GMT Received: from smtprelay01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com ([9.218.2.227]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3r4gt54705-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:39 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com [10.20.54.105]) by smtprelay01.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 35G6sb1V11862540 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:37 GMT Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491CF20040; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CB420043; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-7e025c4c-278d-11b2-a85c-da661cef46c1.ibm.com (unknown [9.171.13.66]) by smtpav06.fra02v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 16 Jun 2023 06:54:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Piyush Sachdeva To: SeongJae Park Cc: sjpark@amazon.de, damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: DAMON testing and benchmarking In-Reply-To: <20230614172700.82480-1-sj@kernel.org> References: <20230614172700.82480-1-sj@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2023 12:22:50 +0530 Message-ID: <87352r6gql.fsf@li-7e025c4c-278d-11b2-a85c-da661cef46c1.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: SarKVKgM3jkO7g9xGS838EvyhLNGw15e X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: SarKVKgM3jkO7g9xGS838EvyhLNGw15e X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.957,Hydra:6.0.591,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-06-16_03,2023-06-15_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1011 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2305260000 definitions=main-2306160057 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3D38D40004 X-Stat-Signature: qnzg364k9eduqt8545uz5cstgm43beo6 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1686898486-767066 X-HE-Meta: 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 0gS92SnZ qFrjRMB941mfk5LYU36LE9L/2kfA0GgZtaAnOrx3wzoJKhCCa/Va/VoYo02INfJ3epUlxaIIlxqGRtuCb/1IOfttBHfE2A/cf4HAB11qFjAxUKqfk+qm2TIDdD/v3WIQU2NOEHfKSISq8vfGcsITaCQOOwZHDmPusZMM2M7V39i6PflxSsVyEJ8PsDUOUxLfBK8PslMCxJLvGWgqNyWEzLkbQepqHZenDE+CAhf0buqpOuwNJiCOzpRypohFzFFCupH8x9jjFX8OKtQz3hp/3/fPC+4a2SHl4kxmnFpD1oJCsBnpkwp/a/zZRiC8RCCKEIoGs9vZPut97r1zdXv9LlBIXbQ== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.002811, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Dear SeongJae Park, SeongJae Park writes: > Hi Piyush, > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 12:18:48 +0530 Piyush Sachdeva wrote: > >> Dear Mr. SeongJae Park, >> I hope this email finds you well. > > It did, thank you for this email :) > >> >> For the last few months, I have been looking at DAMON from an end-users >> perspective and a developer's PoV. Most recently, I was focusing on >> `lru_sort.c` module that uses the `lru_prio` and `lru_deprio` operations >> which result in a more precise reclaim. In my understanding, enabling >> the "lru_sort.c" module would make intelligent decisions based on the >> access frequency of the pages and end up preventing hot page >> swaps. Hence, when integrated with an LRU algorithm, it should improve >> it. >> >> If you could share any test/benchmark that you might have run to verify >> the above assumption? > > Yes, of course. I will share those soon. > >> I did find the result numbers you posted (link below), but that doesn't >> mention the "plrus-*" scheme numbers. It also doesn't have numbers for >> running the `pageout` operation on the entire physical address space (paddr) >> i.e. the `pprcl` scheme. So, if you can link those too, it would be amazing. > > We run an automated test[1] every day, against the latest damon/next tree. And > the page you linked is the output of the test. The latet version contains the > results from `pprcl`[2] and `plrus`[3], but I was too lazy at updating the > document, sorry. I will try to clean up the mess as soon as possible. > >> >> Can you also share any real-world (memory-management specific) workload >> results that you would have used with DAMON in your experiments? Like >> either MongoDB or memcached over Parsec3.0 (including splash2x) - which, >> in my understanding, is less memory intensive and more architecture >> inclined. > > On my personal testing setup, I'm using only parsec3 and splash2x at the > moment. We heard some production DB system is using DAMON_RECLAIM and achieved > about 20% memory footprint reduction, though. > Are you aware of the specifications of the DB system that you are mentioning? 20% is an amazing number and if possible I would like to know more about the details of the workload. >> >> I also had a question regarding schemes - A scheme is highly tweakable, >> and it's what the efficiency of DAMON rests upon. The more precise the >> scheme, the more efficient DAMON will be. Hence, I'd be thankful if you >> can help me derive a config that would provide the best results. > > Very good point. Unfortunately, repeats of experience and adjustment is the > only way as of now, like other tuning practices. Nevertheless, DAMOS supports > some safeguards such as quotas[4], watermarks[5], and filters[6]. Because > quotas feature provides prioritization, setting the access pattern a little > wide, and more focusing on tuning of the quotas might be a good practice. > > I'm trying to add some more easy-to-use intuitive tuning knobs, including > feedback-based quota auto-tuning, which I shared the rough idea at LSFMM[7]. > I did go through your presentation and the summary article on lwn.net . The feedback-mechanism based self-tuning does sound ingriguing and promising to me. >> Hope to hear from you soon. > > Thank you again for this great questions. Please feel free to ask any question > or helps :) > > [1] https://github.com/awslabs/damon-tests/blob/next/perf/full_run.sh > [2] https://github.com/awslabs/damon-tests/blob/next/perf/schemes/pdarc_v4_2_2.json > [3] https://github.com/awslabs/damon-tests/blob/next/perf/schemes/plrus-2.json > [4] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/mm/damon/design.html#quotas > [5] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/mm/damon/design.html#watermarks > [6] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/mm/damon/design.html#filters > [7] https://lwn.net/Articles/931769/ > > > Thanks, > SJ > >> >> Test results: https://damonitor.github.io/test/result/perf/latest/html/ >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Piyush Sachdeva >> Thank you for the information and all the links. -- Regards, Piyush Sachdeva