From: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v6)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:23:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100311222348.GB2427@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100311093913.07c9ca8a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:39:13AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:00:31 +0100
> Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com> wrote:
>
> > Control the maximum amount of dirty pages a cgroup can have at any given time.
> >
> > Per cgroup dirty limit is like fixing the max amount of dirty (hard to reclaim)
> > page cache used by any cgroup. So, in case of multiple cgroup writers, they
> > will not be able to consume more than their designated share of dirty pages and
> > will be forced to perform write-out if they cross that limit.
> >
> > The overall design is the following:
> >
> > - account dirty pages per cgroup
> > - limit the number of dirty pages via memory.dirty_ratio / memory.dirty_bytes
> > and memory.dirty_background_ratio / memory.dirty_background_bytes in
> > cgroupfs
> > - start to write-out (background or actively) when the cgroup limits are
> > exceeded
> >
> > This feature is supposed to be strictly connected to any underlying IO
> > controller implementation, so we can stop increasing dirty pages in VM layer
> > and enforce a write-out before any cgroup will consume the global amount of
> > dirty pages defined by the /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio|dirty_bytes and
> > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio|dirty_background_bytes limits.
> >
> > Changelog (v5 -> v6)
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > * always disable/enable IRQs at lock/unlock_page_cgroup(): this allows to drop
> > the previous complicated locking scheme in favor of a simpler locking, even
> > if this obviously adds some overhead (see results below)
> > * drop FUSE and NILFS2 dirty pages accounting for now (this depends on
> > charging bounce pages per cgroup)
> >
> > Results
> > ~~~~~~~
> > I ran some tests using a kernel build (2.6.33 x86_64_defconfig) on a
> > Intel Core 2 @ 1.2GHz as testcase using different kernels:
> > - mmotm "vanilla"
> > - mmotm with cgroup-dirty-memory using the previous "complex" locking scheme
> > (my previous patchset + the fixes reported by Kame-san and Daisuke-san)
> > - mmotm with cgroup-dirty-memory using the simple locking scheme
> > (lock_page_cgroup() with IRQs disabled)
> >
> > Following the results:
> > <before>
> > - mmotm "vanilla", root cgroup: 11m51.983s
> > - mmotm "vanilla", child cgroup: 11m56.596s
> >
> > <after>
> > - mmotm, "complex" locking scheme, root cgroup: 11m53.037s
> > - mmotm, "complex" locking scheme, child cgroup: 11m57.896s
> >
> > - mmotm, lock_page_cgroup+irq_disabled, root cgroup: 12m5.499s
> > - mmotm, lock_page_cgroup+irq_disabled, child cgroup: 12m9.920s
> >
> > With the "complex" locking solution, the overhead introduced by the
> > cgroup dirty memory accounting is minimal (0.14%), compared with the overhead
> > introduced by the lock_page_cgroup+irq_disabled solution (1.90%).
> >
> Hmm....isn't this bigger than expected ?
Consider that I'm not running the kernel build on tmpfs, but on a fs
defined on /dev/sda. So the additional overhead should be normal
compared to the mmotm vanilla, where there's only FILE_MAPPED
accounting.
-Andrea
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-11 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-09 23:00 [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v6) Andrea Righi
2010-03-09 23:00 ` [PATCH -mmotm 1/5] memcg: disable irq at page cgroup lock Andrea Righi
2010-03-09 23:00 ` [PATCH -mmotm 2/5] memcg: dirty memory documentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-09 23:00 ` [PATCH -mmotm 3/5] page_cgroup: introduce file cache flags Andrea Righi
2010-03-09 23:00 ` [PATCH -mmotm 4/5] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure Andrea Righi
2010-03-10 22:23 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-11 22:27 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-09 23:00 ` [PATCH -mmotm 5/5] memcg: dirty pages instrumentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-10 1:36 ` [PATCH -mmotm 0/5] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v6) Balbir Singh
2010-03-11 0:39 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-11 1:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-11 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-11 9:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-11 9:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-11 22:20 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-12 1:14 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-12 2:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-15 14:48 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-12 10:07 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-11 15:03 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-11 23:27 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-11 23:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-12 10:01 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 14:16 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-11 23:42 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-12 0:33 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 14:38 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-17 22:32 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-11 22:23 ` Andrea Righi [this message]
2010-03-11 18:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-11 23:59 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-12 0:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-12 9:58 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-15 14:41 ` Vivek Goyal
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=20100311222348.GB2427@linux \
--to=arighi@develer.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.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).