From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@intel.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, bp@suse.de,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] drop_caches: add some documentation and info message
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:37:50 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130726213750.GE17975@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1374842669-22844-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 02:44:29PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> I would like to resurrect Dave's patch. It was originally posted here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/16/250 and I have resurrected it here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/12/175 for the first time. There didn't
> seem to be any strong opposition but the patch has been dropped later
> from the mm tree.
>
> To summarize concerns:
> Kosaki was worried about possible excessive logging when somebody drops
> caches too often (but then he claimed he didn't have a strong opinion on
> that) and later acked the patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/12/350).
> I would even dare to say opposite. If somebody drops caches too often
> then I would really like to know that from the log when supporting a
> system because it almost for sure means that there is something fishy
> going on. It is also worth mentioning that only root can write drop
> caches so this is not an flooding attack vector.
Agreed.
> Andrew was worried (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1210.3/00605.html)
> about people hating us because they are using this as a solution to
> their issues. I concur that most of those are just hacks that found
> their way into scripts looong time agon and stayed there. We should
> rather not feed these cargo cults and rather fix the real bugs. History
> has been showing us that users are usually getting rid of old hacks when
> something starts screeming at them. So let's screem.
Agreed. The whole point of this is to be a pain in the ass in order
to establish a feedback loop.
> Boris then noted (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1210.3/00659.html)
> that he is using drop_caches to make s2ram faster but as others noted
> this just adds the overhead to the resume path so it might work only for
> certain use cases. Having a low priority message under such conditions
> shouldn't such a big deal.
A oneliner like this should drown in the overall noise of the
suspend-resume path.
> I am bringing the patch up again because this has proved being really
> helpful when chasing strange performance issues which (surprise
> surprise) turn out to be related to artificially dropped caches done
> because the admin thinks this would help... So mostly those who support
> machines which are not in their hands would benefit from such a change.
>
> I have just refreshed the original patch on top of the current mm tree
> and lowered priority to KERN_INFO to make the message less hysterical.
>
> : From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> : Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:30:54 +0200
> :
> : There is plenty of anecdotal evidence and a load of blog posts
> : suggesting that using "drop_caches" periodically keeps your system
> : running in "tip top shape". Perhaps adding some kernel
> : documentation will increase the amount of accurate data on its use.
> :
> : If we are not shrinking caches effectively, then we have real bugs.
> : Using drop_caches will simply mask the bugs and make them harder
> : to find, but certainly does not fix them, nor is it an appropriate
> : "workaround" to limit the size of the caches.
> :
> : It's a great debugging tool, and is really handy for doing things
> : like repeatable benchmark runs. So, add a bit more documentation
> : about it, and add a little KERN_NOTICE. It should help developers
> : who are chasing down reclaim-related bugs.
>
> [mhocko@suse.cz: refreshed to current -mm tree]
> [akpm@linux-foundation.org: checkpatch fixes]
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
--
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: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@intel.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, bp@suse.de,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] drop_caches: add some documentation and info message
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:37:50 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130726213750.GE17975@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1374842669-22844-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 02:44:29PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> I would like to resurrect Dave's patch. It was originally posted here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/16/250 and I have resurrected it here
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/12/175 for the first time. There didn't
> seem to be any strong opposition but the patch has been dropped later
> from the mm tree.
>
> To summarize concerns:
> Kosaki was worried about possible excessive logging when somebody drops
> caches too often (but then he claimed he didn't have a strong opinion on
> that) and later acked the patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/12/350).
> I would even dare to say opposite. If somebody drops caches too often
> then I would really like to know that from the log when supporting a
> system because it almost for sure means that there is something fishy
> going on. It is also worth mentioning that only root can write drop
> caches so this is not an flooding attack vector.
Agreed.
> Andrew was worried (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1210.3/00605.html)
> about people hating us because they are using this as a solution to
> their issues. I concur that most of those are just hacks that found
> their way into scripts looong time agon and stayed there. We should
> rather not feed these cargo cults and rather fix the real bugs. History
> has been showing us that users are usually getting rid of old hacks when
> something starts screeming at them. So let's screem.
Agreed. The whole point of this is to be a pain in the ass in order
to establish a feedback loop.
> Boris then noted (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1210.3/00659.html)
> that he is using drop_caches to make s2ram faster but as others noted
> this just adds the overhead to the resume path so it might work only for
> certain use cases. Having a low priority message under such conditions
> shouldn't such a big deal.
A oneliner like this should drown in the overall noise of the
suspend-resume path.
> I am bringing the patch up again because this has proved being really
> helpful when chasing strange performance issues which (surprise
> surprise) turn out to be related to artificially dropped caches done
> because the admin thinks this would help... So mostly those who support
> machines which are not in their hands would benefit from such a change.
>
> I have just refreshed the original patch on top of the current mm tree
> and lowered priority to KERN_INFO to make the message less hysterical.
>
> : From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> : Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:30:54 +0200
> :
> : There is plenty of anecdotal evidence and a load of blog posts
> : suggesting that using "drop_caches" periodically keeps your system
> : running in "tip top shape". Perhaps adding some kernel
> : documentation will increase the amount of accurate data on its use.
> :
> : If we are not shrinking caches effectively, then we have real bugs.
> : Using drop_caches will simply mask the bugs and make them harder
> : to find, but certainly does not fix them, nor is it an appropriate
> : "workaround" to limit the size of the caches.
> :
> : It's a great debugging tool, and is really handy for doing things
> : like repeatable benchmark runs. So, add a bit more documentation
> : about it, and add a little KERN_NOTICE. It should help developers
> : who are chasing down reclaim-related bugs.
>
> [mhocko@suse.cz: refreshed to current -mm tree]
> [akpm@linux-foundation.org: checkpatch fixes]
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
> Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-26 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-26 12:44 [PATCH resend] drop_caches: add some documentation and info message Michal Hocko
2013-07-26 12:44 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-26 21:37 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2013-07-26 21:37 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-07-29 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-29 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 7:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 7:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 8:25 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 8:25 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 12:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 12:55 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 14:39 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 14:39 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 14:47 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 14:47 ` Michal Hocko
2013-07-30 14:47 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-30 14:47 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-30 14:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-07-30 14:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-07-30 15:08 ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-30 15:08 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-01 3:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-01 3:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-01 3:17 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-01 3:17 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-02 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-02 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-02 7:33 ` Michal Hocko
2013-08-02 7:33 ` Michal Hocko
2013-08-03 20:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-03 20:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-04 8:07 ` Michal Hocko
2013-08-04 8:07 ` Michal Hocko
2013-08-05 1:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-05 1:13 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-08-05 7:20 ` Michal Hocko
2013-08-05 7:20 ` Michal Hocko
2013-09-17 15:14 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-09-17 15:14 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-08-02 16:04 ` Rob Landley
2013-08-02 16:04 ` Rob Landley
2013-08-02 17:10 ` Dave Hansen
2013-08-02 17:10 ` Dave Hansen
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=20130726213750.GE17975@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
/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.