All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cl@linux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - New round-robin rotor for SLAB allocations
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:52:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100430135239.7782f6ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100426210041.GA6580@sgi.com>

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:00:41 -0500
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> wrote:

> We have observed several workloads running on multi-node systems where
> memory is assigned unevenly across the nodes in the system. There are
> numerous reasons for this but one is the round-robin rotor in
> cpuset_mem_spread_node().
> 
> For example, a simple test that writes a multi-page file will allocate pages
> on nodes 0 2 4 6 ... Odd nodes are skipped.  (Sometimes it allocates on
> odd nodes & skips even nodes).
> 
> An example is shown below. The program "lfile" writes a file consisting of
> 10 pages. The program then mmaps the file & uses get_mempolicy(...,
> MPOL_F_NODE) to determine the nodes where the file pages were allocated.
> The output is shown below:
> 
> 	# ./lfile
> 	 allocated on nodes: 2 4 6 0 1 2 6 0 2
> 
> 
> 
> There is a single rotor that is used for allocating both file pages & slab
> pages.  Writing the file allocates both a data page & a slab page
> (buffer_head).  This advances the RR rotor 2 nodes for each page
> allocated.
> 
> A quick confirmation seems to confirm this is the cause of the uneven
> allocation:
> 
> 	# echo 0 >/dev/cpuset/memory_spread_slab
> 	# ./lfile
> 	 allocated on nodes: 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
> 
> 
> This patch introduces a second rotor that is used for slab allocations.
>
>  include/linux/cpuset.h |    6 ++++++
>  include/linux/sched.h  |    1 +
>  kernel/cpuset.c        |   20 ++++++++++++++++----
>  mm/slab.c              |    2 +-
>  4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Why no update to slob and slub?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cl@linux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - New round-robin rotor for SLAB allocations
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:52:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100430135239.7782f6ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100426210041.GA6580@sgi.com>

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:00:41 -0500
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> wrote:

> We have observed several workloads running on multi-node systems where
> memory is assigned unevenly across the nodes in the system. There are
> numerous reasons for this but one is the round-robin rotor in
> cpuset_mem_spread_node().
> 
> For example, a simple test that writes a multi-page file will allocate pages
> on nodes 0 2 4 6 ... Odd nodes are skipped.  (Sometimes it allocates on
> odd nodes & skips even nodes).
> 
> An example is shown below. The program "lfile" writes a file consisting of
> 10 pages. The program then mmaps the file & uses get_mempolicy(...,
> MPOL_F_NODE) to determine the nodes where the file pages were allocated.
> The output is shown below:
> 
> 	# ./lfile
> 	 allocated on nodes: 2 4 6 0 1 2 6 0 2
> 
> 
> 
> There is a single rotor that is used for allocating both file pages & slab
> pages.  Writing the file allocates both a data page & a slab page
> (buffer_head).  This advances the RR rotor 2 nodes for each page
> allocated.
> 
> A quick confirmation seems to confirm this is the cause of the uneven
> allocation:
> 
> 	# echo 0 >/dev/cpuset/memory_spread_slab
> 	# ./lfile
> 	 allocated on nodes: 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
> 
> 
> This patch introduces a second rotor that is used for slab allocations.
>
>  include/linux/cpuset.h |    6 ++++++
>  include/linux/sched.h  |    1 +
>  kernel/cpuset.c        |   20 ++++++++++++++++----
>  mm/slab.c              |    2 +-
>  4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Why no update to slob and slub?

--
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>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-04-30 20:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-26 21:00 [PATCH] - New round-robin rotor for SLAB allocations Jack Steiner
2010-04-26 21:00 ` Jack Steiner
2010-04-27  1:48 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-27  1:48   ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-30 20:52 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-04-30 20:52   ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-02  2:06   ` Christoph Lameter
2010-05-02  2:06     ` Christoph Lameter

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=20100430135239.7782f6ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --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.