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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8B73C433ED for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:16:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43BF16121E for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:16:10 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 43BF16121E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id B6B136B0070; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:16:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B1A3D6B0074; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:16:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9934D6B0075; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:16:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0184.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.184]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77ABB6B0070 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:16:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin39.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3018E8248047 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:16:09 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78031928058.39.7EA9BD2 Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com (mail-wr1-f51.google.com [209.85.221.51]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8B32C0007C9 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id w4so17177643wrt.5 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 12:15:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cFk9xs2GNfkAG4LwFGmGU5idTsGe49u9Ar1GX/8V8R4=; b=RHqW+I/cdvDL4vkAOSqhD4lvQxt3Y5Aa2VhgrbK6C+OJl5+wZd6bQkVczV0xZIKYS9 CkwU9hFDSKBDT44C7J6Cu9afnSpN6elhc8X8S3fGXNH9nJTfR6s4n0NvBqtz8KuBxI+I +bJJ1UVLMFov2AgHIMn3ug+4k9cvnqitCgqgE6d5tcC7fDRX0EtLXqlSp5/Up3l3tFUt /3togF4vDLRZI/LOabvlLAIuRwBcxwudDEjURLOKGPoZpQAYF4/VzIibnHzPknIL2+th 8pmdkf7VCYgZN4Q0lkxoNNj1+2/Kqbzky0ZoGnBkCQDRArbWG2kfgE9MXadAuP7UiupJ CpwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cFk9xs2GNfkAG4LwFGmGU5idTsGe49u9Ar1GX/8V8R4=; b=AYD2a/0PL6oY0sQfORSd164Jmy7v+5XfT8aqn6xqLAhfRfwdqrmGM9iPRM14Uzplbj WPA4iGyDpkH0wF558QijV+NYtXwFwANHVSeEKmUXGWCg1u2hb/HBnz7aAK9YOIiGSjcF CWe/FrvUWSG6X8cozYutz1Hbc53CxvBes7fG+LPYsVXNv41DLffS8vzo/lNDF0FX+NLz 5I+c5aOLIMMyx04uJNpeTQZQJVq1iFTqJ93rZVjQyN2G/m+t42QSNeaLoML9XM4X6JFY iu8yHuqPTs5eQPOgKCc4Mn6aAms7GFKMsAAv10mh0lzy9+rnLH0l+P8SfU69VBZHBmaY p74g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JLBxiXG9NK5NK0RE05q52tIGTJr4yGS6Ag67UBvOfD/3v9ah/ IZeXz8Igpfmso1m48ghxdoIP0qMmD3OYYOaZxWBw0g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyQL4wEyStvGfDKX4aHEFscf5giZOOpJHx1+tdKcPWnQs4kfikFxy5uEletU2lADZ+akHYan2B7qw89puI99Q0= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6a84:: with SMTP id s4mr35949194wru.92.1618427707498; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 12:15:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210413075155.32652-1-sjpark@amazon.de> <3ddd4f8a-8e51-662b-df11-a63a0e75b2bc@kernel.dk> <20210413231436.GF63242@dread.disaster.area> <20210414155130.GU3762101@tassilo.jf.intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yu Zhao Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 13:14:55 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/16] Multigenerational LRU Framework To: Rik van Riel Cc: Andi Kleen , Dave Chinner , Jens Axboe , SeongJae Park , Linux-MM , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Manes , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Joonsoo Kim , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Miaohe Lin , Michael Larabel , Michal Hocko , Michel Lespinasse , Roman Gushchin , Rong Chen , SeongJae Park , Tim Chen , Vlastimil Babka , Yang Shi , Ying Huang , Zi Yan , linux-kernel , lkp@lists.01.org, Kernel Page Reclaim v2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B8B32C0007C9 X-Stat-Signature: oujyfi6cby9g356pjn43jrfpgaf467ef Received-SPF: none (google.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf06; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mail-wr1-f51.google.com; client-ip=209.85.221.51 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1618427710-722532 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: On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:59 AM Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-04-14 at 08:51 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > 2) It will not scan PTE tables under non-leaf PMD entries that > > > do not > > > have the accessed bit set, when > > > CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PARENT_PMD_YOUNG=y. > > > > This assumes that workloads have reasonable locality. Could there > > be a worst case where only one or two pages in each PTE are used, > > so this PTE skipping trick doesn't work? > > Databases with large shared memory segments shared between > many processes come to mind as a real-world example of a > worst case scenario. Well, I don't think you two are talking about the same thing. Andi was focusing on sparsity. Your example seems to be about sharing, i.e., ihgh mapcount. Of course both can happen at the same time, as I tested here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/YHFuL%2FDdtiml4biw@google.com/#t I'm skeptical that shared memory used by databases is that sparse, i.e., one page per PTE table, because the extremely low locality would heavily penalize their performance. But my knowledge in databases is close to zero. So feel free to enlighten me or just ignore what I said.