From: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mgorman@suse.de, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Subject: [RFCv2][PATCH 0/5] mm: Batch page reclamation under shink_page_list
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 13:34:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130516203427.E3386936@viggo.jf.intel.com> (raw)
These are an update of Tim Chen's earlier work:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1347293960.9977.70.camel@schen9-DESK
I broke the patches up a bit more, and tried to incorporate some
changes based on some feedback from Mel and Andrew.
Changes for v2:
* use page_mapping() accessor instead of direct access
to page->mapping (could cause crashes when running in
to swap cache pages.
* group the batch function's introduction patch with
its first use
* rename a few functions as suggested by Mel
* Ran some single-threaded tests to look for regressions
caused by the batching. If there is overhead, it is only
in the worst-case scenarios, and then only in hundreths of
a percent of CPU time.
If you're curious how effective the batching is, I have a quick
and dirty patch to keep some stats:
https://www.sr71.net/~dave/intel/rmb-stats-only.patch
--
To do page reclamation in shrink_page_list function, there are
two locks taken on a page by page basis. One is the tree lock
protecting the radix tree of the page mapping and the other is
the mapping->i_mmap_mutex protecting the mapped pages. This set
deals only with mapping->tree_lock.
Tim managed to get 14% throughput improvement when with a workload
putting heavy pressure of page cache by reading many large mmaped
files simultaneously on a 8 socket Westmere server.
I've been testing these by running large parallel kernel compiles
on systems that are under memory pressure. During development,
I caught quite a few races on smaller setups, and it's being
quite stable that large (160 logical CPU / 1TB) system.
--
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: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mgorman@suse.de, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Subject: [RFCv2][PATCH 0/5] mm: Batch page reclamation under shink_page_list
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 13:34:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130516203427.E3386936@viggo.jf.intel.com> (raw)
These are an update of Tim Chen's earlier work:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1347293960.9977.70.camel@schen9-DESK
I broke the patches up a bit more, and tried to incorporate some
changes based on some feedback from Mel and Andrew.
Changes for v2:
* use page_mapping() accessor instead of direct access
to page->mapping (could cause crashes when running in
to swap cache pages.
* group the batch function's introduction patch with
its first use
* rename a few functions as suggested by Mel
* Ran some single-threaded tests to look for regressions
caused by the batching. If there is overhead, it is only
in the worst-case scenarios, and then only in hundreths of
a percent of CPU time.
If you're curious how effective the batching is, I have a quick
and dirty patch to keep some stats:
https://www.sr71.net/~dave/intel/rmb-stats-only.patch
--
To do page reclamation in shrink_page_list function, there are
two locks taken on a page by page basis. One is the tree lock
protecting the radix tree of the page mapping and the other is
the mapping->i_mmap_mutex protecting the mapped pages. This set
deals only with mapping->tree_lock.
Tim managed to get 14% throughput improvement when with a workload
putting heavy pressure of page cache by reading many large mmaped
files simultaneously on a 8 socket Westmere server.
I've been testing these by running large parallel kernel compiles
on systems that are under memory pressure. During development,
I caught quite a few races on smaller setups, and it's being
quite stable that large (160 logical CPU / 1TB) system.
next reply other threads:[~2013-05-16 20:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-16 20:34 Dave Hansen [this message]
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 0/5] mm: Batch page reclamation under shink_page_list Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 1/5] defer clearing of page_private() for swap cache pages Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 2/5] make 'struct page' and swp_entry_t variants of swapcache_free() Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` Dave Hansen
2013-05-17 13:27 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-17 13:27 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 3/5] break up __remove_mapping() Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 4/5] break out mapping "freepage" code Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 5/5] batch shrink_page_list() locking operations Dave Hansen
2013-05-16 20:34 ` Dave Hansen
2013-05-17 13:35 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-17 13:35 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-20 21:55 ` [RFCv2][PATCH 0/5] mm: Batch page reclamation under shink_page_list Seth Jennings
2013-05-20 21:55 ` Seth Jennings
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=20130516203427.E3386936@viggo.jf.intel.com \
--to=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.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.