All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com>
Cc: holt@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Improving lock pages
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:47:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130213104755.GH4100@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5115743D.3090903@sgi.com>

On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 03:55:09PM -0600, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
> >The main reason I never made an strong effort to push them upstream
> >because the problems are barely observable on any machine I had access to.
> >The unlock page optimisation requires a page flag and while it helps
> >profiles a little, the effects are barely observable on smaller machines
> >(at least since I last checked).  One machine it was reported to help
> >dramatically was a 768-way 128 node machine.
> >
> >Forthe 512-way machine you're testing with the figures are marginal. The
> >time to exit is shorter but the amount of time is tiny and very close to
> >noise. I forward ported the relevant patches but on a 48-way machine the
> >results for the same test were well within the noise and the standard
> >deviation was higher.
>
> One thing I had noticed the performance curve on this issue is worse
> then linear.
> This has made it tough to measure/capture data on smaller boxes.
> 

While this is true the figures you present are of marginal gain given the
complexity involved.  I know the patches also affected boot-times quite
significantly but this was not a common task for the machines involved.

> >I know you're tasked with improving this area more but what are you
> >using as your example workload? What's the minimum sized machine needed
> >for the optimisations to make a difference?
> >
>
> Right now I am just using the time_exit test I posted earlier.
> I know it is a bit artificial and am open to suggestion.
> 

I'm not currently aware of a workload that is dominated by lock_page
contention and I was expecting SGI was. There are plenty of times where we
stall on lock_page but it's usually IO related and not because processes
trying to acquire the lock went to sleep too quickly.

> One of the rough goals is to get under a second on a 4096 box.
> 
> Also here are some numbers from a larger box with 3.8-rc4...
> nzimmer@uv48-sys:~/tests/time_exit> for I in $(seq 1 5); {
> ./time_exit -p 3 2048; }
>       0.762282
>       0.810356
>       0.777785
>       0.840679
>       0.743509
> 
> nzimmer@uv48-sys:~/tests/time_exit> for I in $(seq 1 5); {
> ./time_exit -p 3 4096; }
>       2.550571
>       2.374378
>       2.669021
>       2.703232
>       2.679028
> 

I collapsed the patches, editted them a bit and pushed them to the
mm-lock-page-optimise-v1r1 branch in the git repository
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mel/linux.git 

The patches are rebased against 3.8-rc6 but I did not pay any special
attention to actually improving them. I did leave a few notes on what could
be done in the changelog. You could try them out as a starting point and
see if they can be reduced to the minimum you require. Unfortunately I
suspect that you'll need a more compelling test case than time_exit on a
4096-way machine to justify pushing them to mainline.

-- 
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>

      reply	other threads:[~2013-02-13 10:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-15 17:38 Improving lock pages Nathan Zimmer
2013-01-15 18:10 ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-02-06 16:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-02-08 21:55   ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-02-13 10:47     ` Mel Gorman [this message]

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=20130213104755.GH4100@suse.de \
    --to=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nzimmer@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.