From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Joel Schopp <jschopp@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Reducing fragmentation using zones
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:13:50 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43D02B3E.5030603@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43CFE77B.3090708@austin.ibm.com>
Joel Schopp wrote:
>> Benchmark comparison between -mm+NoOOM tree and with the new zones
>
> I know you had also previously posted a very simplified version of your
> real fragmentation avoidance patches. I was curious if you could repost
> those with the other benchmarks for a 3 way comparison. The simplified
> version got rid of a lot of the complexity people were complaining about
> and in my mind still seems like preferable direction.
>
I agree. I think you should try with simplified version again.
Then, we can discuss.
I don't like using bitmap which I removed (T.T
> Zone based approaches are runtime inflexible and require boot time
> tuning by the sysadmin. There are lots of workloads that "reasonable"
> defaults for a zone based approach would cause the system to regress
> terribly.
>
IMHO, I don't like automatic runtime tuning, you say 'flexible' here.
I think flexibility allows 2^(MAX_ORDER - 1) size fragmentaion.
When SECTION_SIZE > MAX_ORDER, this is terrible.
I love certainty that sysadmin can grap his system at boot-time.
And, for people who want to remove range of memory, list-based approach will
need some other hook and its flexibility is of no use.
(If list-based approach goes, I or someone will do.)
I know zone->zone_start_pfn can be removed very easily.
This means there is possiblity to reconfigure zone on demand and
zone-based approach can be a bit more fliexible.
- Kame
> -Joel
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log
> files
> for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Lhms-devel mailing list
> Lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lhms-devel
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Joel Schopp <jschopp@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Reducing fragmentation using zones
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:13:50 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43D02B3E.5030603@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43CFE77B.3090708@austin.ibm.com>
Joel Schopp wrote:
>> Benchmark comparison between -mm+NoOOM tree and with the new zones
>
> I know you had also previously posted a very simplified version of your
> real fragmentation avoidance patches. I was curious if you could repost
> those with the other benchmarks for a 3 way comparison. The simplified
> version got rid of a lot of the complexity people were complaining about
> and in my mind still seems like preferable direction.
>
I agree. I think you should try with simplified version again.
Then, we can discuss.
I don't like using bitmap which I removed (T.T
> Zone based approaches are runtime inflexible and require boot time
> tuning by the sysadmin. There are lots of workloads that "reasonable"
> defaults for a zone based approach would cause the system to regress
> terribly.
>
IMHO, I don't like automatic runtime tuning, you say 'flexible' here.
I think flexibility allows 2^(MAX_ORDER - 1) size fragmentaion.
When SECTION_SIZE > MAX_ORDER, this is terrible.
I love certainty that sysadmin can grap his system at boot-time.
And, for people who want to remove range of memory, list-based approach will
need some other hook and its flexibility is of no use.
(If list-based approach goes, I or someone will do.)
I know zone->zone_start_pfn can be removed very easily.
This means there is possiblity to reconfigure zone on demand and
zone-based approach can be a bit more fliexible.
- Kame
> -Joel
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log
> files
> for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Lhms-devel mailing list
> Lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lhms-devel
>
--
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:[~2006-01-20 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-19 19:08 [PATCH 0/5] Reducing fragmentation using zones Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:08 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:08 ` [PATCH 1/5] Add __GFP_EASYRCLM flag and update callers Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:08 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:08 ` [PATCH 2/5] Create the ZONE_EASYRCLM zone Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:08 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` [PATCH 3/5] x86 - Specify amount of kernel memory at boot time Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] ppc64 " Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] ForTesting - Prevent OOM killer firing for high-order allocations Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:09 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-19 19:24 ` [PATCH 0/5] Reducing fragmentation using zones Joel Schopp
2006-01-19 19:24 ` Joel Schopp
2006-01-20 0:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2006-01-20 0:13 ` [Lhms-devel] " KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 1:09 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 1:09 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 1:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 1:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 9:44 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 9:44 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 10:40 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 10:40 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 14:53 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 18:10 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 18:10 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 12:08 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 12:08 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 12:25 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 12:25 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 13:22 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 13:22 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 0:42 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 0:42 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 1:18 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 1:18 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-01-20 12:03 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 12:03 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 13:28 ` [Lhms-devel] " Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 13:28 ` Yasunori Goto
2006-01-20 14:02 ` Mel Gorman
2006-01-20 14:02 ` Mel Gorman
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=43D02B3E.5030603@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=jschopp@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=lhms-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
/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.