From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bob.picco@hp.com,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V7
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:16:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200606071216.24640.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0606071059480.20653@skynet.skynet.ie>
> Right now, x86_64 seems to be the only arch that accounts for the kernel
> image and memmap as holes so I would consider it to be unusual.
s/unusual/more advanced/
> For memory
> hot-add, new memmaps are allocated using kmalloc() and are not accounted
> for as holes.
At least in the standard (non sparsemem) hotadd they are accounted afaik.
> So, on x86_64, some memmaps are holes and others are not.
>
> Why is it a performance regression if the image and memmap is accounted
> for as holes? How are those regions different from any other kernel
> allocation or bootmem allocations for example which are not accounted as
> holes?
They are comparatively big and cannot be freed.
>If you are sure that it makes a measurable difference to performance,
There was at least one benchmark/use case where it made a significant
difference, can't remember the exact numbers though.
-Andi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk, tony.luck@intel.com, bob.picco@hp.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V7
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:16:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200606071216.24640.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0606071059480.20653@skynet.skynet.ie>
> Right now, x86_64 seems to be the only arch that accounts for the kernel
> image and memmap as holes so I would consider it to be unusual.
s/unusual/more advanced/
> For memory
> hot-add, new memmaps are allocated using kmalloc() and are not accounted
> for as holes.
At least in the standard (non sparsemem) hotadd they are accounted afaik.
> So, on x86_64, some memmaps are holes and others are not.
>
> Why is it a performance regression if the image and memmap is accounted
> for as holes? How are those regions different from any other kernel
> allocation or bootmem allocations for example which are not accounted as
> holes?
They are comparatively big and cannot be freed.
>If you are sure that it makes a measurable difference to performance,
There was at least one benchmark/use case where it made a significant
difference, can't remember the exact numbers though.
-Andi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk, tony.luck@intel.com, bob.picco@hp.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V7
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:16:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200606071216.24640.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0606071059480.20653@skynet.skynet.ie>
> Right now, x86_64 seems to be the only arch that accounts for the kernel
> image and memmap as holes so I would consider it to be unusual.
s/unusual/more advanced/
> For memory
> hot-add, new memmaps are allocated using kmalloc() and are not accounted
> for as holes.
At least in the standard (non sparsemem) hotadd they are accounted afaik.
> So, on x86_64, some memmaps are holes and others are not.
>
> Why is it a performance regression if the image and memmap is accounted
> for as holes? How are those regions different from any other kernel
> allocation or bootmem allocations for example which are not accounted as
> holes?
They are comparatively big and cannot be freed.
>If you are sure that it makes a measurable difference to performance,
There was at least one benchmark/use case where it made a significant
difference, can't remember the exact numbers though.
-Andi
--
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:[~2006-06-07 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-06 13:47 [PATCH 0/5] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V7 Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` [PATCH 1/5] Introduce mechanism for registering active regions of memory Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` [PATCH 2/5] Have Power use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes() Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:47 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` [PATCH 3/5] Have x86 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` [PATCH 4/5] Have x86_64 " Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` [PATCH 5/5] Have ia64 " Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 13:48 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-06 22:59 ` (ProteanThread)
2006-06-06 22:59 ` (ProteanThread)
2006-06-06 23:43 ` [PATCH 0/5] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V7 Andrew Morton
2006-06-06 23:43 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-06 23:43 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-07 9:42 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 9:42 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 9:42 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 9:45 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 9:45 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 9:45 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 10:11 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 10:11 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 10:11 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 10:16 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-06-07 10:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 10:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 10:54 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 10:54 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 10:54 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 15:20 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 15:20 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 15:20 ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-07 16:25 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 16:25 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-07 16:25 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-09 12:57 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-09 12:57 ` Mel Gorman
2006-06-09 12:57 ` Mel Gorman
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=200606071216.24640.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bob.picco@hp.com \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.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.