linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Jan kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: ext4 extent status tree LRU locking
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:22:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51B7B128.60909@intel.com> (raw)

I've got a test case which I intended to use to stress the VM a bit.  It
fills memory up with page cache a couple of times.  It essentially runs
30 or so cp's in parallel.

98% of my CPU is system time, and 96% of _that_ is being spent on the
spinlock in ext4_es_lru_add().  I think the LRU list head and its lock
end up being *REALLY* hot cachelines and are *the* bottleneck on this
test.  Note that this is _before_ we go in to reclaim and actually start
calling in to the shrinker.  There is zero memory pressure in this test.

I'm not sure the benefits of having a proper in-order LRU during reclaim
outweigh such a drastic downside for the common case.

Any thoughts?

             reply	other threads:[~2013-06-11 23:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-11 23:22 Dave Hansen [this message]
2013-06-12  7:17 ` ext4 extent status tree LRU locking Zheng Liu
2013-06-12 15:09   ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-12 16:03     ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-12 17:52       ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-12 20:48     ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-13 13:27       ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-13 13:35         ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-14  3:27           ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-14 14:09 ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-14 14:02   ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-14 17:00     ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-14 18:00       ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-17 10:10         ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-17 21:12           ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-18  2:25             ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-18  2:51               ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-18  3:49                 ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-18  2:47           ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-06-14 15:57   ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-14 17:11     ` Zheng Liu
2013-06-14 16:55       ` Dave Hansen

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=51B7B128.60909@intel.com \
    --to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).