From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@leemhuis.info>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: kswapd0: excessive CPU usage
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:04:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121031150438.GK3888@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50910A99.5050707@leemhuis.info>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:25:13PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 30.10.2012 20:18, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:52:03AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >>On 15.10.2012 13:09, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:54:13AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >>>>On 10/12/2012 03:57 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>>>>mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim
> >>>>>Jiri Slaby reported the following:
> >[...]
> >>>>Yes, applying this instead of the revert fixes the issue as well.
> >>Just wondering, is there a reason why this patch wasn't applied to
> >>mainline? Did it simply fall through the cracks? Or am I missing
> >>something?
> >It's because a problem was reported related to the patch (off-list,
> >whoops). I'm waiting to hear if a second patch fixes the problem or not.
>
> Anything in particular I should look out for while testing?
>
Excessive reclaim, high CPU usage by kswapd, processes getting stick in
isolate_migratepages or isolate_freepages.
> >>I'm asking because I think I stil see the issue on
> >>3.7-rc2-git-checkout-from-friday. Seems Fedora rawhide users are
> >>hitting it, too:
> >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866988
> >I like the steps to reproduce.
>
> One of those cases where the bugzilla bug template was not very
> helpful or where it was not used as intended (you decide) :-)
>
It wins at entertainment value if nothing else :)
> >Is step 3 profit?
>
> Yes, but psst, don't tell anyone; step 4 (world domination! for
> real!) is also hidden to keep that part of the big plan a secret for
> now ;-)
>
No doubt it's the default private comment #1 !
> >>Or are we seeing something different which just looks similar? I can
> >>test the patch if it needs further testing, but from the discussion
> >>I got the impression that everything is clear and the patch ready
> >>for merging.
> >It could be the same issue. Can you test with the "mm: vmscan: scale
> >number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim"
> >patch and the following on top please?
>
> Built a vanilla mainline kernel with those two patches and installed
> it on the machine where I was seeing problems high kswapd0 load on
> 3.7-rc3. Ran it an hour yesterday and a few hours today; seems the
> patches fix the issue for me as kswapd behaves:
>
> $ LC_ALL=C ps -aux | grep 'kswapd'
> root 62 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Oct30 0:05 [kswapd0]
>
> So everything is looking fine again so far thx to the two patches
> -- hopefully it stays that way even after hitting "send" in my
> mailer in a few seconds.
>
Ok, great. Keep an eye on it please. If Jiri Slaby reports similar
success then I'll collapse the two patches together and resend to
Andrew.
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora@leemhuis.info>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: kswapd0: excessive CPU usage
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:04:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121031150438.GK3888@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50910A99.5050707@leemhuis.info>
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:25:13PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 30.10.2012 20:18, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:52:03AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >>On 15.10.2012 13:09, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:54:13AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >>>>On 10/12/2012 03:57 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>>>>mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim
> >>>>>Jiri Slaby reported the following:
> >[...]
> >>>>Yes, applying this instead of the revert fixes the issue as well.
> >>Just wondering, is there a reason why this patch wasn't applied to
> >>mainline? Did it simply fall through the cracks? Or am I missing
> >>something?
> >It's because a problem was reported related to the patch (off-list,
> >whoops). I'm waiting to hear if a second patch fixes the problem or not.
>
> Anything in particular I should look out for while testing?
>
Excessive reclaim, high CPU usage by kswapd, processes getting stick in
isolate_migratepages or isolate_freepages.
> >>I'm asking because I think I stil see the issue on
> >>3.7-rc2-git-checkout-from-friday. Seems Fedora rawhide users are
> >>hitting it, too:
> >>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866988
> >I like the steps to reproduce.
>
> One of those cases where the bugzilla bug template was not very
> helpful or where it was not used as intended (you decide) :-)
>
It wins at entertainment value if nothing else :)
> >Is step 3 profit?
>
> Yes, but psst, don't tell anyone; step 4 (world domination! for
> real!) is also hidden to keep that part of the big plan a secret for
> now ;-)
>
No doubt it's the default private comment #1 !
> >>Or are we seeing something different which just looks similar? I can
> >>test the patch if it needs further testing, but from the discussion
> >>I got the impression that everything is clear and the patch ready
> >>for merging.
> >It could be the same issue. Can you test with the "mm: vmscan: scale
> >number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction only in direct reclaim"
> >patch and the following on top please?
>
> Built a vanilla mainline kernel with those two patches and installed
> it on the machine where I was seeing problems high kswapd0 load on
> 3.7-rc3. Ran it an hour yesterday and a few hours today; seems the
> patches fix the issue for me as kswapd behaves:
>
> $ LC_ALL=C ps -aux | grep 'kswapd'
> root 62 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Oct30 0:05 [kswapd0]
>
> So everything is looking fine again so far thx to the two patches
> -- hopefully it stays that way even after hitting "send" in my
> mailer in a few seconds.
>
Ok, great. Keep an eye on it please. If Jiri Slaby reports similar
success then I'll collapse the two patches together and resend to
Andrew.
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-31 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-11 8:52 kswapd0: wxcessive CPU usage Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 8:52 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 13:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-10-11 15:34 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 15:34 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 17:56 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-10-11 17:59 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 17:59 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 18:19 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-10-11 22:08 ` kswapd0: excessive " Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 22:08 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-12 12:37 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-12 12:37 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-12 13:57 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-12 13:57 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-15 9:54 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-15 9:54 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-15 11:09 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-15 11:09 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-29 10:52 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-10-29 10:52 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-10-30 19:18 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-30 19:18 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-31 11:25 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-10-31 11:25 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-10-31 15:04 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2012-10-31 15:04 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-04 16:36 ` Rik van Riel
2012-11-04 16:36 ` Rik van Riel
2012-11-02 10:44 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-02 10:44 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-02 10:53 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-02 10:53 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-02 19:45 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-02 19:45 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-04 11:26 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-04 11:26 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-05 14:24 ` [PATCH] Revert "mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by reclaim/compaction based on failures" Mel Gorman
2012-11-05 14:24 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-06 10:15 ` Johannes Hirte
2012-11-06 10:15 ` Johannes Hirte
2012-11-09 8:36 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-09 8:36 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-14 21:43 ` Johannes Hirte
2012-11-14 21:43 ` Johannes Hirte
2012-11-09 9:12 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-09 9:12 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-09 4:22 ` kswapd0: excessive CPU usage Seth Jennings
2012-11-09 4:22 ` Seth Jennings
2012-11-09 8:07 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-09 8:07 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-09 9:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-09 9:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-11 9:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-11 9:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-12 11:37 ` [PATCH] Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD" Mel Gorman
2012-11-12 11:37 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-16 19:14 ` Josh Boyer
2012-11-16 19:14 ` Josh Boyer
2012-11-16 19:51 ` Andrew Morton
2012-11-16 19:51 ` Andrew Morton
2012-11-20 1:43 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2012-11-16 20:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-16 20:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-20 15:38 ` Josh Boyer
2012-11-20 15:38 ` Josh Boyer
2012-11-20 16:13 ` Bruno Wolff III
2012-11-20 16:13 ` Bruno Wolff III
2012-11-20 17:43 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-11-20 17:43 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-11-23 15:20 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-11-23 15:20 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2012-11-27 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-27 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-21 15:08 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-21 15:08 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-20 9:18 ` Glauber Costa
2012-11-20 9:18 ` Glauber Costa
2012-11-20 20:18 ` Andrew Morton
2012-11-20 20:18 ` Andrew Morton
2012-11-21 8:30 ` Glauber Costa
2012-11-21 8:30 ` Glauber Costa
2012-11-12 12:19 ` kswapd0: excessive CPU usage Mel Gorman
2012-11-12 12:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-12 13:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-12 13:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-12 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-12 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-12 14:50 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-12 14:50 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-18 19:00 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-18 19:00 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2012-11-18 19:07 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-18 19:07 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-11-09 8:40 ` Mel Gorman
2012-11-09 8:40 ` Mel Gorman
2012-10-11 22:14 ` kswapd0: wxcessive " Andrew Morton
2012-10-11 22:14 ` Andrew Morton
2012-10-11 22:26 ` Jiri Slaby
2012-10-11 22:26 ` Jiri Slaby
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=20121031150438.GK3888@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fedora@leemhuis.info \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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.