linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] HWPOISON: remove the unsafe __set_page_locked()
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:44:01 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090928084401.GA22131@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090927192025.GA6327@wotan.suse.de>

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 03:20:25AM +0800, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 06:47:39PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > 
> > > And standard deviation is 0.04%, much larger than the difference 0.008% ..
> > 
> > Sorry that's not correct. I improved the accounting by treating
> > function0+function1 from two CPUs as an integral entity:
> > 
> >                  total time      add_to_page_cache_lru   percent  stddev
> >          before  3880166848.722  9683329.610             0.250%   0.014%
> >          after   3828516894.376  9778088.870             0.256%   0.012%
> >          delta                                           0.006%
> 
> I don't understand why you're doing this NFS workload to measure?

Because it is the first convenient workload hit my mind, and avoids
real disk IO :)

> I see significant nfs, networking protocol and device overheads in
> your profiles, also you're hitting some locks or something which
> is causing massive context switching. So I don't think this is a
> good test.

Yes there are overheads. However it is a real and common workload.

> But anyway as Hugh points out, you need to compare with a
> *completely* fixed kernel, which includes auditing all users of page
> flags non-atomically (slab, notably, but possibly also other
> places).

That's good point. We can do more benchmarks when more fixes are
available. However I suspect their design goal will be "fix them
without introducing noticeable overheads" :)

> One other thing to keep in mind that I will mention is that I am
> going to push in a patch to the page allocator to allow callers
> to avoid the refcounting (atomic_dec_and_test) in page lifetime,
> which is especially important for SLUB and takes more cycles off
> the page allocator...
>
> I don't know exactly what you're going to do after that to get a
> stable reference to slab pages. I guess you can read the page
> flags and speculatively take some slab locks and recheck etc...

For reliably we could skip page lock on zero refcounted pages.

We may lose the PG_hwpoison bit on races with __SetPageSlub*, however
it should be an acceptable imperfection.

Thanks,
Fengguang

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-09-28 15:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-26  3:15 [RFC][PATCH] HWPOISON: remove the unsafe __set_page_locked() Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26  3:49 ` Andi Kleen
2009-09-26 10:52   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26 11:31     ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-27 10:47       ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-27 19:20         ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-28  8:44           ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2009-09-29  5:16             ` Wu Fengguang
2009-10-01  2:02             ` Nick Piggin
2009-10-02 10:54               ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26 11:09 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-09-26 11:48   ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-26 11:58     ` Hugh Dickins
2009-09-26 15:05     ` Andi Kleen
2009-09-26 19:12       ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-26 19:14     ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-26 19:06   ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-26 21:32     ` Andi Kleen
2009-09-27 16:26       ` Hugh Dickins
2009-09-27 19:22         ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-27 21:57           ` Hugh Dickins
2009-09-27 23:01             ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-28  1:19               ` Andi Kleen
2009-09-28  1:52                 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-09-28  2:57                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-09-28  4:11                   ` Andi Kleen
2009-09-28  4:29                     ` Nick Piggin

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=20090928084401.GA22131@localhost \
    --to=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    /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).