From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>, Linux-X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 11:13:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131220111303.GZ11295@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131219164925.GA29546@gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:49:25PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Because we lack data on TLB range flush distributions I think we
> > should still go with the conservative choice for the TLB flush
> > shift. The worst case is really bad here and it's painfully obvious
> > on ebizzy.
>
> So I'm obviously much in favor of this - I'd in fact suggest making
> the conservative choice on _all_ CPU models that have aggressive TLB
> range values right now, because frankly the testing used to pick those
> values does not look all that convincing to me.
>
I think the choices there are already reasonably conservative. I'd be
reluctant to support merging a patch that made a choice on all CPU models
without having access to the machines to run tests on. I don't see the
Intel people volunteering to do the necessary testing.
--
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: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>, Linux-X86 <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 11:13:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131220111303.GZ11295@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131219164925.GA29546@gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:49:25PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Because we lack data on TLB range flush distributions I think we
> > should still go with the conservative choice for the TLB flush
> > shift. The worst case is really bad here and it's painfully obvious
> > on ebizzy.
>
> So I'm obviously much in favor of this - I'd in fact suggest making
> the conservative choice on _all_ CPU models that have aggressive TLB
> range values right now, because frankly the testing used to pick those
> values does not look all that convincing to me.
>
I think the choices there are already reasonably conservative. I'd be
reluctant to support merging a patch that made a choice on all CPU models
without having access to the machines to run tests on. I don't see the
Intel people volunteering to do the necessary testing.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-20 11:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 71+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-13 20:01 [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2 Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86: mm: Clean up inconsistencies when flushing TLB ranges Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86: mm: Account for TLB flushes only when debugging Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86: mm: Change tlb_flushall_shift for IvyBridge Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86: mm: Eliminate redundant page table walk during TLB range flushing Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 20:01 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-13 21:16 ` [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2 Linus Torvalds
2013-12-13 21:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-13 22:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-13 22:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-16 10:39 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 10:39 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 17:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-16 17:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-17 9:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 9:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-15 15:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-15 15:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-15 16:17 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-15 16:17 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-15 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-15 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-16 11:16 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 11:16 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-16 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-16 12:59 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 12:59 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-16 13:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-16 13:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-17 9:21 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 9:21 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-17 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-17 11:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-17 11:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-17 14:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 14:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 14:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-17 14:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-17 17:54 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-17 17:54 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-18 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-18 10:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-19 14:24 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-19 14:24 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-19 16:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-19 16:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-20 11:13 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2013-12-20 11:13 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 11:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-20 11:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-20 12:00 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 12:00 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 12:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-20 12:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-20 13:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 13:55 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-18 10:32 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Assign correct scheduling domain to ' sd_llc' tip-bot for Mel Gorman
2013-12-18 7:28 ` [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2 Fengguang Wu
2013-12-18 7:28 ` Fengguang Wu
2013-12-19 14:34 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-19 14:34 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 15:51 ` Fengguang Wu
2013-12-20 16:44 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-20 16:44 ` Mel Gorman
2013-12-21 15:49 ` Fengguang Wu
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=20131220111303.GZ11295@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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.