From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Han Pingtian <hanpt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Wanpeng Li <liwanp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:47:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140722234726.GO4156@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140722214311.GM4156@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 22.07.2014 [14:43:11 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Hi David,
<snip>
> on powerpc now, things look really good. On a KVM instance with the
> following topology:
>
> available: 2 nodes (0-1)
> node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
> node 0 size: 0 MB
> node 0 free: 0 MB
> node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
> node 1 size: 16336 MB
> node 1 free: 14274 MB
> node distances:
> node 0 1
> 0: 10 40
> 1: 40 10
>
> 3.16.0-rc6 gives:
>
> Slab: 1039744 kB
> SReclaimable: 38976 kB
> SUnreclaim: 1000768 kB
<snip>
> Adding my patch on top of Joonsoo's and the revert, I get:
>
> Slab: 411776 kB
> SReclaimable: 40960 kB
> SUnreclaim: 370816 kB
>
> So CONFIG_SLUB still uses about 3x as much slab memory, but it's not so
> much that we are close to OOM with small VM/LPAR sizes.
Just to clarify/add one more datapoint, with a balanced topology:
available: 2 nodes (0-1)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
node 0 size: 8154 MB
node 0 free: 8075 MB
node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
node 1 size: 8181 MB
node 1 free: 7776 MB
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 40
1: 40 10
I see the following for my patch + Joonsoo's + the revert:
Slab: 495872 kB
SReclaimable: 46528 kB
SUnreclaim: 449344 kB
(Although these numbers fluctuate quite a bit between 250M and 500M),
which indicates that the memoryless node slab consumption is now on-par
with a populated topology. And both are still more than CONFIG_SLAB
requires.
Thanks,
Nish
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Han Pingtian <hanpt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Wanpeng Li <liwanp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:47:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140722234726.GO4156@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140722214311.GM4156@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 22.07.2014 [14:43:11 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Hi David,
<snip>
> on powerpc now, things look really good. On a KVM instance with the
> following topology:
>
> available: 2 nodes (0-1)
> node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
> node 0 size: 0 MB
> node 0 free: 0 MB
> node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
> node 1 size: 16336 MB
> node 1 free: 14274 MB
> node distances:
> node 0 1
> 0: 10 40
> 1: 40 10
>
> 3.16.0-rc6 gives:
>
> Slab: 1039744 kB
> SReclaimable: 38976 kB
> SUnreclaim: 1000768 kB
<snip>
> Adding my patch on top of Joonsoo's and the revert, I get:
>
> Slab: 411776 kB
> SReclaimable: 40960 kB
> SUnreclaim: 370816 kB
>
> So CONFIG_SLUB still uses about 3x as much slab memory, but it's not so
> much that we are close to OOM with small VM/LPAR sizes.
Just to clarify/add one more datapoint, with a balanced topology:
available: 2 nodes (0-1)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
node 0 size: 8154 MB
node 0 free: 8075 MB
node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
node 1 size: 8181 MB
node 1 free: 7776 MB
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 40
1: 40 10
I see the following for my patch + Joonsoo's + the revert:
Slab: 495872 kB
SReclaimable: 46528 kB
SUnreclaim: 449344 kB
(Although these numbers fluctuate quite a bit between 250M and 500M),
which indicates that the memoryless node slab consumption is now on-par
with a populated topology. And both are still more than CONFIG_SLAB
requires.
Thanks,
Nish
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-22 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 229+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-07 2:21 [PATCH] slub: Don't throw away partial remote slabs if there is no local memory Anton Blanchard
2014-01-07 2:21 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-07 4:19 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 4:19 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 4:19 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 4:19 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-08 14:17 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-08 14:17 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-07 6:49 ` Andi Kleen
2014-01-07 6:49 ` Andi Kleen
2014-01-08 14:03 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-08 14:03 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-07 7:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 7:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 8:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:10 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 9:10 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 9:21 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:21 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:21 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:21 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 9:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 9:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 8:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 8:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 8:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:52 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:52 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 9:52 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-09 0:20 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-09 0:20 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-07 9:52 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-20 9:10 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-20 9:10 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-20 9:10 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-20 9:10 ` Wanpeng Li
[not found] ` <52dce7fe.e5e6420a.5ff6.ffff84a0SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2014-01-20 22:13 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-20 22:13 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-21 2:20 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-21 2:20 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-21 2:20 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-21 2:20 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:09 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:09 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:09 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:09 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:14 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:14 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:14 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-24 3:14 ` Wanpeng Li
[not found] ` <52e1da8f.86f7440a.120f.25f3SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2014-01-24 15:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-24 15:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-24 21:03 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-24 21:03 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-24 22:19 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-24 22:19 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-24 23:29 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-24 23:29 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-24 23:49 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-24 23:49 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-25 0:16 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-25 0:16 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-25 0:25 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-25 0:25 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-25 1:10 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-25 1:10 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-27 5:58 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-27 5:58 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-28 18:29 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-28 18:29 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-29 15:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-29 15:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-29 22:36 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-29 22:36 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-01-30 16:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-30 16:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-03 23:00 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-03 23:00 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-04 3:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-04 3:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-04 7:26 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-04 7:26 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-04 20:39 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-04 20:39 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-05 0:13 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-05 0:13 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-05 19:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-05 19:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 2:08 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 2:08 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 17:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 17:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-27 16:18 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-27 16:18 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 2:07 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 2:07 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 8:04 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:04 ` Joonsoo Kim
[not found] ` <20140206185955.GA7845@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2014-02-06 19:28 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 19:28 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-07 8:03 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 8:03 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:07 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] slub: search partial list on numa_mem_id(), instead of numa_node_id() Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:07 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:07 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:07 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:52 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 8:52 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 10:29 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 10:29 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 19:11 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-06 19:11 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-07 5:42 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 5:42 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 20:52 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 20:52 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-07 5:48 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 5:48 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 17:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 17:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 18:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 18:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 21:38 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-07 21:38 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-10 1:15 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-10 1:15 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-10 1:29 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-10 1:29 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-11 18:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-11 18:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-10 19:13 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-10 19:13 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-11 7:42 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-11 7:42 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-12 22:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-12 22:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-13 3:53 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-13 3:53 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-17 6:52 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-17 6:52 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-18 16:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 16:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-19 22:04 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 22:04 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-20 16:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-20 16:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-24 5:08 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-24 5:08 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-24 19:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-24 19:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-03-13 16:51 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-03-13 16:51 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 17:22 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 17:22 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-13 6:51 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-13 6:51 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-17 7:00 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-17 7:00 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-18 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 17:28 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 17:28 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 19:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 19:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 21:09 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 21:09 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 21:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 21:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-18 22:22 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 22:22 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-19 16:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-19 16:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-19 22:03 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 22:03 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-08 9:57 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-08 9:57 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-10 1:09 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-10 1:09 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-07-22 1:03 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-07-22 1:03 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-07-22 1:16 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-22 1:16 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-22 21:43 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-07-22 21:43 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-07-22 21:49 ` Tejun Heo
2014-07-22 21:49 ` Tejun Heo
2014-07-22 23:47 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2014-07-22 23:47 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-07-23 0:43 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-23 0:43 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 8:07 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] slub: fallback to get_numa_mem() node if we want to allocate on memoryless node Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:07 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 17:30 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 17:30 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 5:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 5:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-07 17:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-07 17:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-10 1:22 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-10 1:22 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-02-06 8:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] slub: search partial list on numa_mem_id(), instead of numa_node_id() David Rientjes
2014-02-06 8:37 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-06 17:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 17:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 17:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-02-06 17:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-16 23:37 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-05-16 23:37 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-05-19 2:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-19 2:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-06-05 0:13 ` [RESEND PATCH] " David Rientjes
2014-06-05 0:13 ` David Rientjes
2014-06-05 0:13 ` David Rientjes
2014-01-27 16:24 ` [PATCH] slub: Don't throw away partial remote slabs if there is no local memory Christoph Lameter
2014-01-27 16:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-27 16:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-27 16:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-01-07 9:42 ` David Laight
2014-01-07 9:42 ` David Laight
2014-01-08 14:14 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-08 14:14 ` Anton Blanchard
2014-01-07 10:28 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 10:28 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 10:28 ` Wanpeng Li
2014-01-07 10:28 ` Wanpeng Li
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=20140722234726.GO4156@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=hanpt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=liwanp@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tj@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.