From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@in.ibm.com>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: shrinkable cache statistics [was Re: VM balancing issues on 2.6.13: dentry cache not getting shrunk enough]
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:25:51 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051005212551.GA10057@logos.cnet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051004133635.GA23575@in.ibm.com>
Hi Bharata,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 07:06:35PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> Marcelo,
>
> Here's my next attempt in breaking the "slabs_scanned" from /proc/vmstat
> into meaningful per cache statistics. Now I have the statistics counters
> as percpu. [an issue remaining is that there are more than one cache as
> part of mbcache and they all have a common shrinker routine and I am
> displaying the collective shrinker stats info on each of them in
> /proc/slabinfo ==> some kind of duplication]
Looks good to me! IMO it should be a candidate for -mm/mainline.
Nothing useful to suggest on the mbcache issue... sorry.
> With this patch (and my earlier dcache stats patch) I observed some
> interesting results with the following test scenario on a 8cpu p3 box:
>
> - Ran an application which consumes 40% of the total memory.
> - Ran dbench on tmpfs with 128 clients twice (serially).
> - Ran a find on a ext3 partition having ~9.5million entries (files and
> directories included)
>
> At the end of this run, I have the following results:
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 3872528 kB
> MemFree: 1420940 kB
> Buffers: 714068 kB
> Cached: 21536 kB
> SwapCached: 2264 kB
> Active: 1672680 kB
> Inactive: 637460 kB
> HighTotal: 3014616 kB
> HighFree: 1411740 kB
> LowTotal: 857912 kB
> LowFree: 9200 kB
> SwapTotal: 2096472 kB
> SwapFree: 2051408 kB
> Dirty: 172 kB
> Writeback: 0 kB
> Mapped: 1583680 kB
> Slab: 119564 kB
> CommitLimit: 4032736 kB
> Committed_AS: 1647260 kB
> PageTables: 2248 kB
> VmallocTotal: 114680 kB
> VmallocUsed: 1264 kB
> VmallocChunk: 113384 kB
> nr_dentries/page nr_pages nr_inuse
> 0 0 0
> 1 5 2
> 2 12 4
> 3 26 9
> 4 46 18
> 5 76 40
> 6 82 47
> 7 91 59
> 8 122 93
> 9 114 102
> 10 142 136
> 11 138 185
> 12 118 164
> 13 128 206
> 14 126 208
> 15 120 219
> 16 136 261
> 17 159 315
> 18 145 311
> 19 179 379
> 20 192 407
> 21 256 631
> 22 286 741
> 23 316 816
> 24 342 934
> 25 381 1177
> 26 664 2813
> 27 0 0
> 28 0 0
> 29 0 0
> Total: 4402 10277
> dcache lru: total 75369 inuse 3599
>
> [Here,
> nr_dentries/page - Number of dentries per page
> nr_pages - Number of pages with given number of dentries
> nr_inuse - Number of inuse dentries in those pages.
> Eg: From the above data, there are 26 pages with 3 dentries each
> and out of 78 total dentries in these 3 pages, 9 dentries are in use.]
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# grep shrinker /proc/slabinfo
> # name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab> : tunables <limit> <batchcount> <sharedfactor> : slabdata <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail> : shrinker stat <nr requested> <nr freed>
> ext3_xattr 0 0 48 78 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0
> dquot 0 0 160 24 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0
> inode_cache 1301 1390 400 10 1 : tunables 54 27 8 : slabdata 139 139 0 : shrinker stat 682752 681900
> dentry_cache 82110 114452 152 26 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 4402 4402 0 : shrinker stat 1557760 760100
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# grep slabs_scanned /proc/vmstat
> slabs_scanned 2240512
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# cat /proc/sys/fs/dentry-state
> 82046 75369 45 0 3599 0
> [The order of dentry-state o/p is like this:
> total dentries in dentry hash list, total dentries in lru list, age limit,
> want_pages, inuse dentries in lru list, dummy]
>
> So, we can see that with low memory pressure, even though the
> shrinker runs on dcache repeatedly, not many dentries are freed
> by dcache. And dcache lru list still has huge number of free
> dentries.
The success/attempt ratio is about 1/2, which seems alright?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
To: Bharata B Rao <bharata@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: shrinkable cache statistics [was Re: VM balancing issues on 2.6.13: dentry cache not getting shrunk enough]
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:25:51 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051005212551.GA10057@logos.cnet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051004133635.GA23575@in.ibm.com>
Hi Bharata,
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 07:06:35PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> Marcelo,
>
> Here's my next attempt in breaking the "slabs_scanned" from /proc/vmstat
> into meaningful per cache statistics. Now I have the statistics counters
> as percpu. [an issue remaining is that there are more than one cache as
> part of mbcache and they all have a common shrinker routine and I am
> displaying the collective shrinker stats info on each of them in
> /proc/slabinfo ==> some kind of duplication]
Looks good to me! IMO it should be a candidate for -mm/mainline.
Nothing useful to suggest on the mbcache issue... sorry.
> With this patch (and my earlier dcache stats patch) I observed some
> interesting results with the following test scenario on a 8cpu p3 box:
>
> - Ran an application which consumes 40% of the total memory.
> - Ran dbench on tmpfs with 128 clients twice (serially).
> - Ran a find on a ext3 partition having ~9.5million entries (files and
> directories included)
>
> At the end of this run, I have the following results:
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 3872528 kB
> MemFree: 1420940 kB
> Buffers: 714068 kB
> Cached: 21536 kB
> SwapCached: 2264 kB
> Active: 1672680 kB
> Inactive: 637460 kB
> HighTotal: 3014616 kB
> HighFree: 1411740 kB
> LowTotal: 857912 kB
> LowFree: 9200 kB
> SwapTotal: 2096472 kB
> SwapFree: 2051408 kB
> Dirty: 172 kB
> Writeback: 0 kB
> Mapped: 1583680 kB
> Slab: 119564 kB
> CommitLimit: 4032736 kB
> Committed_AS: 1647260 kB
> PageTables: 2248 kB
> VmallocTotal: 114680 kB
> VmallocUsed: 1264 kB
> VmallocChunk: 113384 kB
> nr_dentries/page nr_pages nr_inuse
> 0 0 0
> 1 5 2
> 2 12 4
> 3 26 9
> 4 46 18
> 5 76 40
> 6 82 47
> 7 91 59
> 8 122 93
> 9 114 102
> 10 142 136
> 11 138 185
> 12 118 164
> 13 128 206
> 14 126 208
> 15 120 219
> 16 136 261
> 17 159 315
> 18 145 311
> 19 179 379
> 20 192 407
> 21 256 631
> 22 286 741
> 23 316 816
> 24 342 934
> 25 381 1177
> 26 664 2813
> 27 0 0
> 28 0 0
> 29 0 0
> Total: 4402 10277
> dcache lru: total 75369 inuse 3599
>
> [Here,
> nr_dentries/page - Number of dentries per page
> nr_pages - Number of pages with given number of dentries
> nr_inuse - Number of inuse dentries in those pages.
> Eg: From the above data, there are 26 pages with 3 dentries each
> and out of 78 total dentries in these 3 pages, 9 dentries are in use.]
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# grep shrinker /proc/slabinfo
> # name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab> : tunables <limit> <batchcount> <sharedfactor> : slabdata <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail> : shrinker stat <nr requested> <nr freed>
> ext3_xattr 0 0 48 78 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0
> dquot 0 0 160 24 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0
> inode_cache 1301 1390 400 10 1 : tunables 54 27 8 : slabdata 139 139 0 : shrinker stat 682752 681900
> dentry_cache 82110 114452 152 26 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 4402 4402 0 : shrinker stat 1557760 760100
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# grep slabs_scanned /proc/vmstat
> slabs_scanned 2240512
>
> [root@llm09 bharata]# cat /proc/sys/fs/dentry-state
> 82046 75369 45 0 3599 0
> [The order of dentry-state o/p is like this:
> total dentries in dentry hash list, total dentries in lru list, age limit,
> want_pages, inuse dentries in lru list, dummy]
>
> So, we can see that with low memory pressure, even though the
> shrinker runs on dcache repeatedly, not many dentries are freed
> by dcache. And dcache lru list still has huge number of free
> dentries.
The success/attempt ratio is about 1/2, which seems alright?
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-06 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-11 10:57 VM balancing issues on 2.6.13: dentry cache not getting shrunk enough Theodore Ts'o
2005-09-11 12:00 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-11 12:00 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-12 3:16 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-09-12 3:16 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-09-12 6:16 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-12 6:16 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-12 12:53 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-12 12:53 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-13 8:47 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-13 21:59 ` David Chinner
2005-09-13 21:59 ` David Chinner
2005-09-14 9:01 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-14 9:01 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-14 9:16 ` Manfred Spraul
2005-09-14 9:16 ` Manfred Spraul
2005-09-14 9:43 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 9:43 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 9:52 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-14 9:52 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-14 22:44 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-09-14 22:44 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-09-14 9:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 9:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 13:57 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-14 13:57 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-09-14 15:37 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-14 15:37 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-15 7:21 ` Helge Hafting
2005-09-15 7:21 ` Helge Hafting
2005-09-14 22:48 ` David Chinner
2005-09-14 22:48 ` David Chinner
2005-09-14 15:48 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-14 15:48 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-14 22:02 ` David Chinner
2005-09-14 22:02 ` David Chinner
2005-09-14 22:40 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-14 22:40 ` Sonny Rao
2005-09-15 1:14 ` David Chinner
2005-09-15 1:14 ` David Chinner
2005-10-06 6:27 ` [PATCH] dcache: separate slab for directory dentries David Chinner, gnb
2005-10-06 12:28 ` Dave Kleikamp
2005-10-07 3:54 ` Greg Banks
2005-10-07 13:00 ` Dave Kleikamp
2005-09-14 21:34 ` VM balancing issues on 2.6.13: dentry cache not getting shrunk enough Marcelo Tosatti
2005-09-14 21:34 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-09-14 21:43 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-14 21:43 ` Dipankar Sarma
2005-09-15 4:28 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-15 4:28 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-14 23:08 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-09-14 23:08 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-09-15 9:39 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-15 9:39 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-09-15 13:29 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-09-15 13:29 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-10-02 16:32 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-10-02 20:06 ` Marcelo
2005-10-02 20:06 ` Marcelo
2005-10-04 13:36 ` shrinkable cache statistics [was Re: VM balancing issues on 2.6.13: dentry cache not getting shrunk enough] Bharata B Rao
2005-10-05 21:25 ` Marcelo Tosatti [this message]
2005-10-05 21:25 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2005-10-07 8:12 ` Bharata B Rao
2005-10-07 8:12 ` Bharata B Rao
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=20051005212551.GA10057@logos.cnet \
--to=marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com \
--cc=bharata@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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.