From: Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
mgorman@suse.de, mhocko@suse.cz, riel@redhat.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmscan.c: wrap five parameters into shrink_result for reducing the stack consumption
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:04:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1402715082.750.13.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140613162807.GP2878@cmpxchg.org>
On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 12:28 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 01:21:15PM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 21:40 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 12:36:31 +0800 Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > @@ -1148,7 +1146,8 @@ unsigned long reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
> > > > .priority = DEF_PRIORITY,
> > > > .may_unmap = 1,
> > > > };
> > > > - unsigned long ret, dummy1, dummy2, dummy3, dummy4, dummy5;
> > > > + unsigned long ret;
> > > > + struct shrink_result dummy = { };
> > >
> > > You didn't like the idea of making this static?
> > Sorry! It's my negligence.
> > If we make dummy static, it can help us save more stack.
> >
> > without change:
> > 0xffffffff810aede8 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 184
> > 0xffffffff810aeef8 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 184
> >
> > with change: struct shrink_result dummy = {};
> > 0xffffffff810aed6c reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 152
> > 0xffffffff810aee68 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 152
> >
> > with change: static struct shrink_result dummy ={};
> > 0xffffffff810aed69 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 120
> > 0xffffffff810aee4d reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 120
>
> FWIW, I copied bloat-o-meter and hacked up a quick comparison tool
> that you can feed two outputs of checkstack.pl for a whole vmlinux and
> it shows you the delta.
>
> The output for your patch (with the static dummy) looks like this:
>
> +0/-240 -240
> shrink_inactive_list 136 112 -24
> shrink_page_list 208 160 -48
> reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 168 - -168
>
> (The stack footprint for reclaim_clean_pages_from_list is actually 96
> after your patch, but checkstack.pl skips frames under 100)
>
Thanks very much for your comparison tool. Its output is more concise.
thx!
cyc
gcc version 4.7.3 (Gentoo 4.7.3-r1 p1.4, pie-0.5.5)
kernel version 3.15(stable)
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5670 @ 1.80GHz
The output for this patch (with the static dummy) is:
+0/-144 -144
shrink_inactive_list 152 120 -32
shrink_page_list 232 184 -48
reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 184 120 -64
-------
gcc version 4.7.2 (Debian 4.7.2-5)
kernel version 3.15(stable)
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2320 CPU @ 3.00GHz
The output for this patch (with the static dummy) is:
shrink_inactive_list 136 120 -16
shrink_page_list 216 168 -48
reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 184 120 -64
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
mgorman@suse.de, mhocko@suse.cz, riel@redhat.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/vmscan.c: wrap five parameters into shrink_result for reducing the stack consumption
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:04:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1402715082.750.13.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140613162807.GP2878@cmpxchg.org>
On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 12:28 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 01:21:15PM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 21:40 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 12:36:31 +0800 Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > @@ -1148,7 +1146,8 @@ unsigned long reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
> > > > .priority = DEF_PRIORITY,
> > > > .may_unmap = 1,
> > > > };
> > > > - unsigned long ret, dummy1, dummy2, dummy3, dummy4, dummy5;
> > > > + unsigned long ret;
> > > > + struct shrink_result dummy = { };
> > >
> > > You didn't like the idea of making this static?
> > Sorry! It's my negligence.
> > If we make dummy static, it can help us save more stack.
> >
> > without change:
> > 0xffffffff810aede8 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 184
> > 0xffffffff810aeef8 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 184
> >
> > with change: struct shrink_result dummy = {};
> > 0xffffffff810aed6c reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 152
> > 0xffffffff810aee68 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 152
> >
> > with change: static struct shrink_result dummy ={};
> > 0xffffffff810aed69 reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 120
> > 0xffffffff810aee4d reclaim_clean_pages_from_list []: 120
>
> FWIW, I copied bloat-o-meter and hacked up a quick comparison tool
> that you can feed two outputs of checkstack.pl for a whole vmlinux and
> it shows you the delta.
>
> The output for your patch (with the static dummy) looks like this:
>
> +0/-240 -240
> shrink_inactive_list 136 112 -24
> shrink_page_list 208 160 -48
> reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 168 - -168
>
> (The stack footprint for reclaim_clean_pages_from_list is actually 96
> after your patch, but checkstack.pl skips frames under 100)
>
Thanks very much for your comparison tool. Its output is more concise.
thx!
cyc
gcc version 4.7.3 (Gentoo 4.7.3-r1 p1.4, pie-0.5.5)
kernel version 3.15(stable)
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T5670 @ 1.80GHz
The output for this patch (with the static dummy) is:
+0/-144 -144
shrink_inactive_list 152 120 -32
shrink_page_list 232 184 -48
reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 184 120 -64
-------
gcc version 4.7.2 (Debian 4.7.2-5)
kernel version 3.15(stable)
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2320 CPU @ 3.00GHz
The output for this patch (with the static dummy) is:
shrink_inactive_list 136 120 -16
shrink_page_list 216 168 -48
reclaim_clean_pages_from_list 184 120 -64
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-14 3:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-13 4:36 [PATCH v2] mm/vmscan.c: wrap five parameters into shrink_result for reducing the stack consumption Chen Yucong
2014-06-13 4:36 ` Chen Yucong
2014-06-13 4:40 ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-13 4:40 ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-13 5:21 ` Chen Yucong
2014-06-13 5:21 ` Chen Yucong
2014-06-13 16:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-13 16:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-14 3:04 ` Chen Yucong [this message]
2014-06-14 3:04 ` Chen Yucong
2014-06-13 4:52 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2014-06-13 4:52 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2014-06-13 5:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-13 5:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-13 10:21 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2014-06-13 10:21 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2014-06-13 5:10 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-13 5:10 ` Johannes Weiner
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=1402715082.750.13.camel@debian \
--to=slaoub@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=riel@redhat.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.