From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>, Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] mm, huge page: Copy to access sub-page last when copy huge page
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 09:51:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fu2lkc7d.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180518062430.GB21711@dhcp22.suse.cz> (Michal Hocko's message of "Fri, 18 May 2018 08:24:30 +0200")
Hi, Michal,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri 18-05-18 11:03:16, Huang, Ying wrote:
> [...]
>> The patch is a generic optimization which should benefit quite some
>> workloads, not for a specific use case. To demonstrate the performance
>> benefit of the patch, we tested it with vm-scalability run on
>> transparent huge page.
>
> It is also adds quite some non-intuitive code. So is this worth? Does
> any _real_ workload benefits from the change?
I don't have any _real_ workload which benefits from this. But I think
this is the right way to copy the huge page. It should benefit many
workloads with heavy cache contention, as illustrated in the
micro-benchmark. But the performance benefit may be small or
non-measurable for the _real_ workload.
The code does become not as intuitive as before. But fortunately, all
non-intuitive code are in copy_user_huge_page(), which is a leaf
function with well defined interface and semantics. And with the help
of the code comments, at least the intention of the code is clear.
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
>> include/linux/mm.h | 3 ++-
>> mm/huge_memory.c | 3 ++-
>> mm/memory.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>, Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] mm, huge page: Copy to access sub-page last when copy huge page
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 09:51:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fu2lkc7d.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180518062430.GB21711@dhcp22.suse.cz> (Michal Hocko's message of "Fri, 18 May 2018 08:24:30 +0200")
Hi, Michal,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri 18-05-18 11:03:16, Huang, Ying wrote:
> [...]
>> The patch is a generic optimization which should benefit quite some
>> workloads, not for a specific use case. To demonstrate the performance
>> benefit of the patch, we tested it with vm-scalability run on
>> transparent huge page.
>
> It is also adds quite some non-intuitive code. So is this worth? Does
> any _real_ workload benefits from the change?
I don't have any _real_ workload which benefits from this. But I think
this is the right way to copy the huge page. It should benefit many
workloads with heavy cache contention, as illustrated in the
micro-benchmark. But the performance benefit may be small or
non-measurable for the _real_ workload.
The code does become not as intuitive as before. But fortunately, all
non-intuitive code are in copy_user_huge_page(), which is a leaf
function with well defined interface and semantics. And with the help
of the code comments, at least the intention of the code is clear.
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
>> include/linux/mm.h | 3 ++-
>> mm/huge_memory.c | 3 ++-
>> mm/memory.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-21 1:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-18 3:03 [PATCH -mm] mm, huge page: Copy to access sub-page last when copy huge page Huang, Ying
2018-05-18 6:24 ` Michal Hocko
2018-05-18 16:41 ` Mike Kravetz
2018-05-21 2:34 ` Huang, Ying
2018-05-21 2:34 ` Huang, Ying
2018-05-21 1:51 ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2018-05-21 1:51 ` Huang, Ying
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=87fu2lkc7d.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com \
--to=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=shli@fb.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.