From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8756C433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 21:09:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CEA64DE5 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 21:09:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230260AbhCJVIs (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 16:08:48 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33518 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231778AbhCJVIi (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 16:08:38 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2FF7C061756 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:08:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id h4so27513570ljl.0 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:08:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cACQQWqG6uSUB0AGVgSEUJ4B4wJ68O5aodDpa+9zBtE=; b=TD528uq6ivKl36WWTHHJw/09uqZOROwIWdNmdS7C/SQIUBmkTfKhrO3WhbTLpi33Yd vuzVI3zn01/vbNvVSS7s3JCGNhdSLUnX4pS92ZzArfy2HjSDolAGYai4Jowj8xedrtfs eitt16XYmZB2QuyFScmS+Csnw4EKgfOJHbj1r3zXYVHmlKWe1KBfJuluPCM6x6k7jZeq lgJmr+miho41dvdhpIhRa74hCa1QCr43YSd3z2Y3mnLiQwIidUERKBWZ+yb/ADP6nUrs wAcohDBJp8TJG4bfM3LEzMEhLB6H+lFG2/I4WxbkON4RTUt5666MAekU7kQdmpUNO6Yp nhyA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cACQQWqG6uSUB0AGVgSEUJ4B4wJ68O5aodDpa+9zBtE=; b=F9OfEOlOqRwEJ5VKV2oBehHP0yyi5ULN2zhWIUgQWoOFCpv9JegBvcaSNxISQ9PsND NpNfEmYn+E4nqkE7H7fuiK3yGR2g+08JC6GWbElQQ3Jdl5/Gl8oCmJfUiux8QogtLIHW PMuka+hYlnmM2SapPeuubVi2aw1iw2Z2TK1soryP7PSvF0NDjaHW1nv4T0Ng59M2E2er cZK0Slm0H28DA721c79Wwh18bT3deWUvdMxwcwqTrXS7y2eFcMdhwPTHGJvt3aRStRLV 07pUahJKuDvSJpU+TWQ0qLY1/cwaVwUT5RIar+76yOgVmmDf1b3ut4gC2fxQswpoVEvJ BxRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ZUHkxwdJxLTbzo4eCzVvergO/CHqYFnRoOn8I4GEgoOj0hlIB QaHINRCMTADakXJHa7bC/jhOqKzM2/1iW+1E9n+FWw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJziZrjBJ9Z8nbqy4riATwMtJzR2H3vO3xCUy6/+X/e3KusmZB2RF4BFcfabm3GgOq/lDz2ZuH4ze1WXtxxMN9U= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8984:: with SMTP id c4mr2796500lji.456.1615410516228; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:08:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210310174603.5093-1-shy828301@gmail.com> <20210310174603.5093-14-shy828301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Shakeel Butt Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:08:24 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [v9 PATCH 13/13] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority To: Yang Shi Cc: Roman Gushchin , Kirill Tkhai , Vlastimil Babka , Dave Chinner , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , Linux MM , linux-fsdevel , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:54 AM Yang Shi wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:24 AM Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 9:46 AM Yang Shi wrote: > > > > > > The number of deferred objects might get windup to an absurd number, and it > > > results in clamp of slab objects. It is undesirable for sustaining workingset. > > > > > > So shrink deferred objects proportional to priority and cap nr_deferred to twice > > > of cache items. > > > > > > The idea is borrowed from Dave Chinner's patch: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191031234618.15403-13-david@fromorbit.com/ > > > > > > Tested with kernel build and vfs metadata heavy workload in our production > > > environment, no regression is spotted so far. > > > > Did you run both of these workloads in the same cgroup or separate cgroups? > > Both are covered. > Have you tried just this patch i.e. without the first 12 patches?