From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Nanyong Sun <sunnanyong@huawei.com>
Cc: hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com,
ryan.roberts@arm.com, baohua@kernel.org,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, ioworker0@gmail.com,
peterx@redhat.com, ziy@nvidia.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: control mthp per process/cgroup
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 19:15:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zr-XVn1ExJ7_LSLS@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240816091327.54183-1-sunnanyong@huawei.com>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:13:27PM +0800, Nanyong Sun wrote:
> Now the large folio control interfaces is system wide and tend to be
> default on: file systems use large folio by default if supported,
> mTHP is tend to default enable when boot [1].
> When large folio enabled, some workloads have performance benefit,
> but some may not and some side effects can happen: the memory usage
> may increase, direct reclaim maybe more frequently because of more
> large order allocations, result in cpu usage also increases. We observed
> this on a product environment which run nginx, the pgscan_direct count
> increased a lot than before, can reach to 3000 times per second, and
> disable file large folio can fix this.
Can you share any details of your nginx workload that shows a regression?
The heuristics for allocating large folios are completely untuned, so
having data for a workload which performs better with small folios is
very valuable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-16 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-16 9:13 Nanyong Sun
2024-08-16 18:15 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2024-08-19 5:58 ` Nanyong Sun
2024-08-26 2:26 ` Nanyong Sun
2024-09-02 9:36 ` Baolin Wang
2024-09-02 13:33 ` David Hildenbrand
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=Zr-XVn1ExJ7_LSLS@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=sunnanyong@huawei.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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