From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1][PATCH]page_fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:15:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081121231511.ce59702e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <604427e00811212247k1fe6b63u9efe8cfe37bddfb5@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:47:44 -0800 Ying Han <yinghan@google.com> wrote:
> page fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY
> Allow major faults to drop the mmap_sem read lock while waitting for
> synchronous disk read. This allows another thread which wishes to grab
> down_read(mmap_sem) to proceed while the current is waitting the disk IO.
Confused. down_read() on an rwsem will already permit multiple threads
to run that section of ccode concurrently.
The benefit here will be to permit down_write() callers (eg:
sys_mmap()) to get in there and do work.
> The patch flags current->flags to PF_FAULT_MAYRETRY as identify that the
> caller can tolerate the retry in the filemap_fault call patch.
>
> Benchmark is done by mmap in huge file and spaw 64 thread each faulting in
> pages in reverse order, the the result shows 8% porformance hit with the
> patch.
You mean it slowed down 8%? I'm a bit surprised - I'd have expected a
smaller slowdown for an IO-intensive thing like this.
Does it speed anything up?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1][PATCH]page_fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:15:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081121231511.ce59702e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <604427e00811212247k1fe6b63u9efe8cfe37bddfb5@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:47:44 -0800 Ying Han <yinghan@google.com> wrote:
> page fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY
> Allow major faults to drop the mmap_sem read lock while waitting for
> synchronous disk read. This allows another thread which wishes to grab
> down_read(mmap_sem) to proceed while the current is waitting the disk IO.
Confused. down_read() on an rwsem will already permit multiple threads
to run that section of ccode concurrently.
The benefit here will be to permit down_write() callers (eg:
sys_mmap()) to get in there and do work.
> The patch flags current->flags to PF_FAULT_MAYRETRY as identify that the
> caller can tolerate the retry in the filemap_fault call patch.
>
> Benchmark is done by mmap in huge file and spaw 64 thread each faulting in
> pages in reverse order, the the result shows 8% porformance hit with the
> patch.
You mean it slowed down 8%? I'm a bit surprised - I'd have expected a
smaller slowdown for an IO-intensive thing like this.
Does it speed anything up?
--
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:[~2008-11-22 7:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-22 6:47 [RFC v1][PATCH]page_fault retry with NOPAGE_RETRY Ying Han
2008-11-22 6:47 ` Ying Han
2008-11-22 7:15 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-11-22 7:15 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-23 9:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 18:24 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-23 18:24 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-25 18:42 ` Ying Han
2008-11-25 18:42 ` Ying Han
2008-11-26 12:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-26 12:32 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-26 19:57 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-26 19:57 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 8:55 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 8:55 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 9:28 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 9:28 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-27 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-27 10:14 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 10:14 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 19:22 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 19:22 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-28 9:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-28 9:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-28 22:46 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-28 22:46 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 11:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-27 11:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-27 19:10 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 19:10 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 11:39 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 11:39 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 12:03 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 12:03 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 12:21 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 12:21 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 12:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-27 12:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-27 12:39 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 12:39 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 12:52 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 12:52 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 13:05 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 13:05 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 13:10 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 13:10 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 13:12 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 13:12 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 13:23 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 13:23 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-28 12:10 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-28 12:10 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-30 19:38 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-30 19:38 ` Török Edwin
2008-12-01 8:52 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 8:52 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 11:13 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 11:13 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 11:37 ` Török Edwin
2008-12-01 11:37 ` Török Edwin
2008-12-04 22:27 ` Ying Han
2008-12-04 22:27 ` Ying Han
2008-12-05 6:50 ` Török Edwin
2008-12-05 6:50 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-27 13:08 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 13:08 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-27 19:03 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-27 19:03 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-28 9:37 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-28 9:37 ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-28 23:02 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-28 23:02 ` Mike Waychison
2008-11-30 19:54 ` Török Edwin
2008-11-30 19:54 ` Török Edwin
2008-12-01 4:50 ` Mike Waychison
2008-12-01 4:50 ` Mike Waychison
2008-12-01 8:58 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 8:58 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 11:45 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-01 11:45 ` Nick Piggin
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=20081121231511.ce59702e.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rohitseth@google.com \
--cc=yinghan@google.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.