linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	tkhai@ya.ru, hannes@cmpxchg.org, shakeelb@google.com,
	mhocko@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, david@redhat.com,
	shy828301@gmail.com, sultan@kerneltoast.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
	penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp, paulmck@kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] make slab shrink lockless
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 18:11:34 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c949c89a-0b0d-723f-4c60-f6374b1993f3@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y/z+P5cgeunD6u21@P9FQF9L96D>



On 2023/2/28 03:02, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 09:31:51PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2023/2/27 03:51, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 22:46:47 +0800 Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>>
>> Save the above script, then run test and touch commands.
>>
>> Then we can use the following perf command to view hotspots:
>>
>> perf top -U -F 999
>>
>> 1) Before applying this patchset:
>>
>>    32.31%  [kernel]           [k] down_read_trylock
>>    19.40%  [kernel]           [k] pv_native_safe_halt
>>    16.24%  [kernel]           [k] up_read
>>    15.70%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_slab
>>     4.69%  [kernel]           [k] _find_next_bit
>>     2.62%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_node
>>     1.78%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_lruvec
>>     0.76%  [kernel]           [k] do_shrink_slab
>>
>> 2) After applying this patchset:
>>
>>    27.83%  [kernel]           [k] _find_next_bit
>>    16.97%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_slab
>>    15.82%  [kernel]           [k] pv_native_safe_halt
>>     9.58%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_node
>>     8.31%  [kernel]           [k] shrink_lruvec
>>     5.64%  [kernel]           [k] do_shrink_slab
>>     3.88%  [kernel]           [k] mem_cgroup_iter
> 
> Not opposing the intention of the patchset in any way (I actually think
> it's a good idea to make the shrinkers list lockless), but looking at
> both outputs above I think that the main problem is not the contention on
> the semaphore, but the reason of this contention.

Yes, in the above scenario, there is indeed no lock contention problem.

> 
> It seems like often there is a long list of shrinkers which barely
> can reclaim any memory, but we're calling them again and again.
> In order to achieve real wins with real-life workloads, I guess
> it's what we should optimize.
> 
> Thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Qi


      reply	other threads:[~2023-02-28 10:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-26 14:46 Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] mm: vmscan: add a map_nr_max field to shrinker_info Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:54   ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] mm: vmscan: make global slab shrink lockless Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] mm: vmscan: make memcg " Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] mm: vmscan: add shrinker_srcu_generation Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] mm: shrinkers: make count and scan in shrinker debugfs lockless Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] mm: vmscan: hold write lock to reparent shrinker nr_deferred Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] mm: vmscan: remove shrinker_rwsem from synchronize_shrinkers() Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] mm: shrinkers: convert shrinker_rwsem to mutex Qi Zheng
2023-02-26 19:51 ` [PATCH v3 0/8] make slab shrink lockless Andrew Morton
2023-02-27 13:31   ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-27 15:08     ` Mike Rapoport
2023-02-27 19:20       ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-27 19:32         ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-27 19:47           ` Kirill Tkhai
2023-02-28 10:08         ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-28 10:04       ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-28 10:53         ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-28 18:40       ` Michal Hocko
2023-03-01  2:27         ` Qi Zheng
2023-02-27 19:02     ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-28 10:11       ` Qi Zheng [this message]

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=c949c89a-0b0d-723f-4c60-f6374b1993f3@bytedance.com \
    --to=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=sultan@kerneltoast.com \
    --cc=tkhai@ya.ru \
    /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