Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: memcg: fix tracking of pending stats updates values

[Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>]

On Mon 25-09-23 10:11:05, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 6:50 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri 22-09-23 17:57:38, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > > While working on adjacent code [1], I realized that the values passed
> > > into memcg_rstat_updated() to keep track of the magnitude of pending
> > > updates is consistent. It is mostly in pages, but sometimes it can be in
> > > bytes or KBs. Fix that.
> >
> > What kind of practical difference does this change make? Is it worth
> > additional code?
> 
> As explained in patch 2's commit message, the value passed into
> memcg_rstat_updated() is used for the "flush only if not worth it"
> heuristic. As we have discussed in different threads in the past few
> weeks, unnecessary flushes can cause increased global lock contention
> and/or latency.
> 
> Byte-sized paths (percpu, slab, zswap, ..) feed bytes into the
> heuristic, but those are interpreted as pages, which means we will
> flush earlier than we should. This was noticed by code inspection. How
> much does this matter in practice? I would say it depends on the
> workload: how many percpu/slab allocations are being made vs. how many
> flushes are requested.
> 
> On a system with 100 cpus, 25M of stat updates are needed for a flush
> usually, but ~6K of slab/percpu updates will also (mistakenly) cause a
> flush.

This surely depends on workload and that is understandable. But it would
be really nice to provide some numbers for typical workloads which
exercise slab heavily. 
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs