From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
devel@openvz.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>
Subject: [RFC 0/7] Initial proposal for faster res_counter updates
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:04:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1333094685-5507-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> (raw)
Hi,
Here is my take about how we can make res_counter updates faster.
Keep in mind this is a bit of a hack intended as a proof of concept.
The pros I see with this:
* free updates in non-constrained paths. non-constrained paths includes
unlimited scenarios, but also ones in which we are far from the limit.
* No need to have a special cache mechanism in memcg. The problem with
the caching is my opinion, is that we will forward-account pages, meaning
that we'll consider accounted pages we never used. I am not sure
anyone actually ran into this, but in theory, this can fire events
much earlier than it should.
But the cons:
* percpu counters have signed quantities, so this would limit us 4G.
We can add a shift and then count pages instead of bytes, but we
are still in the 16T area here. Maybe we really need more than that.
* some of the additions here may slow down the percpu_counters for
users that don't care about our usage. Things about min/max tracking
enter in this category.
* growth of the percpu memory.
It is still not clear for me if we should use percpu_counters as this
patch implies, or if we should just replicate its functionality.
I need to go through at least one more full round of auditing before
making sure the locking is safe, specially my use of synchronize_rcu().
As for measurements, the cache we have in memcg kind of distort things.
I need to either disable it, or find the cases in which it is likely
to lose and benchmark them, such as deep hierarchy concurrent updates
with common parents.
I also included a possible optimization that can be done when we
are close to the limit to avoid the initial tests altogether, but
it needs to be extended to avoid scanning the percpu areas as well.
In summary, if this is to be carried forward, it definitely needs
some love. It should be, however, more than enough to make the
proposal clear.
Comments are appreciated.
Glauber Costa (7):
split percpu_counter_sum
consolidate all res_counter manipulation
bundle a percpu counter into res_counters and use its lock
move res_counter_set limit to res_counter.c
use percpu_counters for res_counter usage
Add min and max statistics to percpu_counter
Global optimization
include/linux/percpu_counter.h | 3 +
include/linux/res_counter.h | 63 ++++++-----------
kernel/res_counter.c | 151 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
lib/percpu_counter.c | 16 ++++-
4 files changed, 151 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
--
1.7.4.1
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2012-03-30 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-30 8:04 Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 1/7] split percpu_counter_sum Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 2/7] consolidate all res_counter manipulation Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 3/7] bundle a percpu counter into res_counters and use its lock Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 4/7] move res_counter_set limit to res_counter.c Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 5/7] use percpu_counters for res_counter usage Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 9:33 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-30 9:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-30 13:53 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-09 1:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-30 12:59 ` Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 6/7] Add min and max statistics to percpu_counter Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:04 ` [RFC 7/7] Global optimization Glauber Costa
2012-03-30 8:32 ` [RFC 0/7] Initial proposal for faster res_counter updates KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-30 10:46 ` Glauber Costa
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=1333094685-5507-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@parallels.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 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).