From: Julian Wollrath <jwollrath@web.de>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Julian Wollrath <jwollrath@web.de>,
Patrik Kullman <patrik.kullman@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: Major performance regressions in 3.7rc1/2
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:04:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121023110434.021d100b@ilfaris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1210222059120.1136@eggly.anvils>
> > Thanks. Let's add some cc's. Can you please describe your workload
> > and some estimate of the slowdown?
I am using fluxbox with Iceweasel, Claws-Mail and urxvt on different
workspaces on a Thinkpad X121e with an AMD E-450 APU. Loading some big
pages in Iceweasel leades to a very sluggish rendering of the urxvt
window when changing workspaces, the cursor movement falters. The
falter in the cursor movement is from random length but I would
estimate, that it is mostly under one second. But sometimes the time
between the each falter is very short which results in a more or less
unusable system.
> I'm currently assuming that my clear_page_mlock() commit is innocent
> of this: it went in just two before David's numa reclaim commit, and
> I don't see how mine could have any such marked effect: I'm thinking
> it was just a bisection hiccup that implicated it.
Just tested v3.7-rc2 with your clear_page_mlock() and without the numa
reclaim commit and everything worked fine. So you are right, most
probable it was a bisection hiccup, the reclaim commit is the real bad
commit. Nevertheless I am wondering why everything worked fine until
39b5f29a (mm: remove vma arg from page_evictable) and then started to
behave badly with your clear_page_mlock() commit but 3.7-rc2 works fine
with only the numa reclaim commit revoked.
With best regards,
Julian Wollrath
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Julian Wollrath <jwollrath@web.de>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Julian Wollrath <jwollrath@web.de>,
Patrik Kullman <patrik.kullman@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: Major performance regressions in 3.7rc1/2
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:04:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121023110434.021d100b@ilfaris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1210222059120.1136@eggly.anvils>
> > Thanks. Let's add some cc's. Can you please describe your workload
> > and some estimate of the slowdown?
I am using fluxbox with Iceweasel, Claws-Mail and urxvt on different
workspaces on a Thinkpad X121e with an AMD E-450 APU. Loading some big
pages in Iceweasel leades to a very sluggish rendering of the urxvt
window when changing workspaces, the cursor movement falters. The
falter in the cursor movement is from random length but I would
estimate, that it is mostly under one second. But sometimes the time
between the each falter is very short which results in a more or less
unusable system.
> I'm currently assuming that my clear_page_mlock() commit is innocent
> of this: it went in just two before David's numa reclaim commit, and
> I don't see how mine could have any such marked effect: I'm thinking
> it was just a bisection hiccup that implicated it.
Just tested v3.7-rc2 with your clear_page_mlock() and without the numa
reclaim commit and everything worked fine. So you are right, most
probable it was a bisection hiccup, the reclaim commit is the real bad
commit. Nevertheless I am wondering why everything worked fine until
39b5f29a (mm: remove vma arg from page_evictable) and then started to
behave badly with your clear_page_mlock() commit but 3.7-rc2 works fine
with only the numa reclaim commit revoked.
With best regards,
Julian Wollrath
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-23 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-22 6:03 Major performance regressions in 3.7rc1/2 Patrik Kullman
2012-10-22 6:37 ` Jimster480
2012-10-22 15:33 ` Julian Wollrath
2012-10-22 19:45 ` Julian Wollrath
2012-10-23 0:04 ` Andrew Morton
2012-10-23 0:04 ` Andrew Morton
2012-10-23 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-10-23 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-10-23 9:04 ` Julian Wollrath [this message]
2012-10-23 9:04 ` Julian Wollrath
2012-10-23 10:52 ` Anca Emanuel
2012-10-23 10:52 ` Anca Emanuel
2012-10-23 22:42 ` David Rientjes
2012-10-23 22:42 ` David Rientjes
2012-10-23 23:15 ` Anca Emanuel
2012-10-23 23:15 ` Anca Emanuel
2012-10-24 1:55 ` [patch for-3.7] mm, numa: avoid setting zone_reclaim_mode unless a node is sufficiently distant David Rientjes
2012-10-24 1:55 ` David Rientjes
2012-10-24 8:38 ` Julian Wollrath
2012-10-24 8:38 ` Julian Wollrath
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=20121023110434.021d100b@ilfaris \
--to=jwollrath@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=patrik.kullman@gmail.com \
--cc=rientjes@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.