From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sysvshm: SHM_LOCK use lru_add_drain_all_async()
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 03:34:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHGf_=rKjz40Oq--M3QB74WJ7uDYSC+mM+DO53XdX2Pq_nFzkQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1201032103580.1522@eggly.anvils>
2012/1/4 Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2012, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> (1/3/12 8:51 PM), Hugh Dickins wrote:
>> >
>> > In testing my fix for that, I find that there has been no attempt to
>> > keep the Unevictable count accurate on SysVShm: SHM_LOCK pages get
>> > marked unevictable lazily later as memory pressure discovers them -
>> > which perhaps mirrors the way in which SHM_LOCK makes no attempt to
>> > instantiate pages, unlike mlock.
>>
>> Ugh, you are right. I'm recovering my remember gradually. Lee implemented
>> immediate lru off logic at first and I killed it
>> to close a race. I completely forgot. So, yes, now SHM_LOCK has no attempt to
>> instantiate pages. I'm ashamed.
>
> Why ashamed? The shmctl man-page documents "The caller must fault in any
> pages that are required to be present after locking is enabled." That's
> just how it behaves.
hehe, I have big bad reputation about for bad remember capabilities from
my friends. I should have remembered what i implemented. ;-)
>> > (But in writing this, realize I still don't quite understand why
>> > the Unevictable count takes a second or two to get back to 0 after
>> > SHM_UNLOCK: perhaps I've more to discover.)
>>
>> Interesting. I'm looking at this too.
>
> In case you got distracted before you found it, mm/vmstat.c's
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct delayed_work, vmstat_work);
> int sysctl_stat_interval __read_mostly = HZ;
>
> static void vmstat_update(struct work_struct *w)
> {
> refresh_cpu_vm_stats(smp_processor_id());
> schedule_delayed_work(&__get_cpu_var(vmstat_work),
> round_jiffies_relative(sysctl_stat_interval));
> }
>
> would be why, I think. And that implies to me that your
> lru_add_drain_all_async() is not necessary, you'd get just as good
> an effect, more cheaply, by doing a local lru_add_drain() before the
> refresh in vmstat_update().
When, I implement lru_add_drain_all_async(), I thought this idea. I don't
dislike both. But if we take vmstat_update() one, I think we need more tricks.
pcp draining in refresh_cpu_vm_stats() delays up to 3 seconds. Why?
round_jiffies_relative() don't silly round to HZ boundary. Instead of, it adds
a few unique offset per each cpus. thus, 3 seconds mean max 3000cpus
don't make zone_{lru_}lock contention. pagevec draining also need same
trick for rescue SGI UV. It might be too pessimistic concern. but
vmstat_update() shouldn't make obsevable lock contention.
> But it would still require your changes to ____pagevec_lru_add_fn(),
> if those turn out to help more than they hurt.
I agree.
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-04 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-30 6:36 [PATCH] mm: do not drain pagevecs for mlock Tao Ma
2011-12-30 8:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-12-30 8:48 ` Tao Ma
2011-12-30 9:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-12-30 9:45 ` Tao Ma
2011-12-30 10:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-01 7:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm,mlock: drain pagevecs asynchronously kosaki.motohiro
2012-01-04 1:17 ` Minchan Kim
2012-01-04 2:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-10 8:53 ` Tao Ma
2012-01-04 2:56 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-01-04 22:05 ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-04 23:33 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-05 0:19 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-01-01 7:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] sysvshm: SHM_LOCK use lru_add_drain_all_async() kosaki.motohiro
2012-01-04 1:51 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-01-04 2:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-04 5:17 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-01-04 8:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2012-01-06 6:13 ` [PATCH] mm: do not drain pagevecs for mlock Tao Ma
2012-01-06 6:18 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-06 6:30 ` Tao Ma
2012-01-06 6:33 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-06 6:46 ` Tao Ma
2012-01-09 23:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-01-10 2:08 ` Tao Ma
2012-01-09 7:25 ` Tao Ma
2011-12-30 10:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
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='CAHGf_=rKjz40Oq--M3QB74WJ7uDYSC+mM+DO53XdX2Pq_nFzkQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=walken@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