All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, osalvador@suse.de
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	dan.j.williams@gmail.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC Get rid of shrink code - memory-hotplug]
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 10:54:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <42699b27-c214-91fd-e7e9-d34e16e9bf9f@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181205191244.GV1286@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 12/5/18 8:12 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Cc Vlastimil]
> 
> On Tue 04-12-18 13:43:31, osalvador@suse.de wrote:
>> On 2018-12-04 12:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>  > If I am not wrong, zone_contiguous is a pure mean for performance
>>> improvement, right? So leaving zone_contiguous unset is always save. I
>>> always disliked the whole clear/set_zone_contiguous thingy. I wonder if
>>> we can find a different way to boost performance there (in the general
>>> case). Or is this (zone_contiguous) even worth keeping around at all for
>>> now? (do we have performance numbers?)
>>
>> It looks like it was introduced by 7cf91a98e607
>> ("mm/compaction: speed up pageblock_pfn_to_page() when zone is contiguous").
>>
>> The improve numbers are in the commit.
>> So I would say that we need to keep it around.
> 
> Is that still the case though?

Well, __pageblock_pfn_to_page() has to be called for each pageblock in
compaction, when zone_contiguous is false. And that's unchanged since
the introduction of zone_contiguous, so the numbers should still hold.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-07  9:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-04  9:26 [RFC Get rid of shrink code - memory-hotplug] osalvador
2018-12-04 11:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-12-04 12:43   ` osalvador
2018-12-05 19:12     ` Michal Hocko
2018-12-07  9:54       ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2018-12-07 10:32         ` Michal Hocko
2018-12-07 10:35           ` osalvador
2018-12-10 13:53             ` osalvador
2018-12-10 15:02               ` David Hildenbrand
2018-12-10 17:16               ` Michal Hocko
2018-12-12  8:44                 ` osalvador
2018-12-05 19:07 ` Michal Hocko

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=42699b27-c214-91fd-e7e9-d34e16e9bf9f@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@gmail.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.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.