From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] zsmalloc: allow only one active pool compaction context
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 08:58:55 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230417235855.GR25053@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkbENFJ3YVrt9fs7AzHVfN+9oCA_4j+9qnpJHrFVEjqhug@mail.gmail.com>
On (23/04/17 11:32), Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > /proc/lock-stat after make -j$((`nproc`+1)) linux kernel for
> > &pool->lock#3:
> >
> > Base Patched
> > ------------------------------------------
> > con-bounces 2035730 1540066
> > contentions 2343871 1774348
> > waittime-min 0.10 0.10
> > waittime-max 4004216.24 2745.22
> > waittime-total 101334168.29 67865414.91
> > waittime-avg 43.23 38.25
> > acq-bounces 2895765 2186745
> > acquisitions 6247686 5136943
> > holdtime-min 0.07 0.07
> > holdtime-max 2605507.97 482439.16
> > holdtime-total 9998599.59 5107151.01
> > holdtime-avg 1.60 0.99
>
> The numbers seem to be better when using an atomic vs. a mutex, is
> this just noise or significant difference? (I am not familiar with
> lock-stat).
Pretty sure that's just noise. The test is make -j72 on a system
that swaps out, so it's terribly noisy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-17 23:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-17 13:54 [PATCHv2] zsmalloc: allow only one active pool compaction context Sergey Senozhatsky
2023-04-17 18:32 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-04-17 23:58 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2023-04-18 0:41 ` Andrew Morton
2023-04-18 2:53 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-04-18 11:24 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2023-04-18 19:37 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-04-18 3:05 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
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=20230417235855.GR25053@google.com \
--to=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.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.