From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] - Randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:57:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100429035718.GT4920@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100428154034.fb823484.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 03:40:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:04:32 -0500
> Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> > Some workloads that create a large number of small files tend to assign
> > too many pages to node 0 (multi-node systems). Part of the reason is that
> > the rotor (in cpuset_mem_spread_node()) used to assign nodes starts
> > at node 0 for newly created tasks.
>
> And, presumably, your secret testcase forks lots of subprocesses which
> do the file creation?
I think the test case he was using was aim7 or a kernel compile.
Anything that opens a lot of small files will quickly deplete node 0.
> > This patch changes the rotor to be initialized to a random node number
> > of the cpuset.
>
> Why random as opposed to, say, inherit-rotor-from-parent?
If I have something like a find ... -exec grep ..., won't the pages
be biased towards the nodes adjacent to the parent's rotor values.
Maybe I misunderstood Jack's problem, but I believe that was what he
was seeing and why he chose random.
I hope I did not misunderstand Jack's problem and mislead this discussion.
Thanks,
Robin Holt
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] - Randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread_node()
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:57:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100429035718.GT4920@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100428154034.fb823484.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 03:40:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:04:32 -0500
> Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> > Some workloads that create a large number of small files tend to assign
> > too many pages to node 0 (multi-node systems). Part of the reason is that
> > the rotor (in cpuset_mem_spread_node()) used to assign nodes starts
> > at node 0 for newly created tasks.
>
> And, presumably, your secret testcase forks lots of subprocesses which
> do the file creation?
I think the test case he was using was aim7 or a kernel compile.
Anything that opens a lot of small files will quickly deplete node 0.
> > This patch changes the rotor to be initialized to a random node number
> > of the cpuset.
>
> Why random as opposed to, say, inherit-rotor-from-parent?
If I have something like a find ... -exec grep ..., won't the pages
be biased towards the nodes adjacent to the parent's rotor values.
Maybe I misunderstood Jack's problem, but I believe that was what he
was seeing and why he chose random.
I hope I did not misunderstand Jack's problem and mislead this discussion.
Thanks,
Robin Holt
--
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:[~2010-04-30 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-28 13:12 [PATCH] - Randomize node rotor used in cpuset_mem_spread_node() Jack Steiner
2010-04-28 13:12 ` Jack Steiner
2010-04-28 15:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Jack Steiner
2010-04-28 15:04 ` Jack Steiner
2010-04-28 22:40 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-28 22:40 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-28 23:04 ` Matt Mackall
2010-04-28 23:04 ` Matt Mackall
2010-04-28 23:12 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-28 23:12 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-28 23:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-04-28 23:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-04-28 23:28 ` Matt Mackall
2010-04-28 23:28 ` Matt Mackall
2010-04-29 3:57 ` Robin Holt [this message]
2010-04-29 3:57 ` Robin Holt
2010-04-29 20:08 ` Jack Steiner
2010-04-29 20:08 ` Jack Steiner
2010-04-29 20:09 ` [PATCH v3] " Jack Steiner
2010-04-29 20:09 ` Jack Steiner
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=20100429035718.GT4920@sgi.com \
--to=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=steiner@sgi.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.