From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: page allocator: Drain per-cpu lists after direct reclaim allocation fails
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2010 17:58:40 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100904075840.GE705@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100903202101.f937b0bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 08:21:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 12:25:45 +1000 Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
>
> > Still, given the improvements in performance from this patchset,
> > I'd say inclusion is a no-braniner....
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> It'd be interesting to check the IPI frequency with and without -
> /proc/interrupts "CAL" field. Presumably it went down a lot.
Maybe I suspected you would ask for this. I happened to dump
/proc/interrupts after the livelock run finished, so you're in
luck :)
The lines below are:
before: before running the single 50M inode create workload
after: the numbers after the run completes
livelock: the numbers after two runs with a livelock in the second
Vanilla 2.6.36-rc3:
before: 561 350 614 282 559 335 365 363
after: 10472 10473 10544 10681 9818 10837 10187 9923
.36-rc3 With patchset:
before: 452 426 441 337 748 321 498 357
after: 9463 9112 8671 8830 9391 8684 9768 8971
The numbers aren't that different - roughly 10% lower on average
with the patchset. I will state that vanilla kernel runs I ijust did
had noticably more consistent performance than the previous results
I had acheived, so perhaps it wasn't triggering the livelock
conditions as effectively this time through.
And finally:
livelock: 59458 58367 58559 59493 59614 57970 59060 58207
So the livelock case tends to indicate roughly 40,000 more IPI
interrupts per CPU occurred. The livelock occurred for close to 5
minutes, so that's roughly 130 IPIs per second per CPU....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
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:[~2010-09-04 8:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-03 9:08 [PATCH 0/3] Reduce watermark-related problems with the per-cpu allocator V4 Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 9:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm: page allocator: Update free page counters after pages are placed on the free list Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-05 18:06 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 9:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: page allocator: Calculate a better estimate of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory is low and kswapd is awake Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 22:55 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-03 23:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-03 23:28 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-04 0:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-05 18:12 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 9:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: page allocator: Drain per-cpu lists after direct reclaim allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-09-03 23:00 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-04 2:25 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-04 3:21 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-04 7:58 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2010-09-04 8:14 ` Dave Chinner
[not found] ` <20100905015400.GA10714@localhost>
[not found] ` <20100905021555.GG705@dastard>
[not found] ` <20100905060539.GA17450@localhost>
[not found] ` <20100905131447.GJ705@dastard>
2010-09-05 13:45 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-05 23:33 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-06 4:02 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-06 8:40 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 21:50 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-08 8:49 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-09 12:39 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-10 6:17 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-07 14:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-08 2:13 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-04 3:23 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-04 3:59 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-04 4:37 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-05 18:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-05 18:14 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 7:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-08 20:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-09 12:41 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-09 13:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-09 13:55 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-09 14:32 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-09-09 15:05 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-10 2:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-03 23:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] Reduce watermark-related problems with the per-cpu allocator V4 Andrew Morton
2010-09-21 11:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-21 12:58 ` [stable] " Greg KH
2010-09-21 14:23 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-23 18:49 ` Greg KH
2010-09-24 9:14 ` Mel Gorman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-08-31 17:37 [PATCH 0/3] Reduce watermark-related problems with the per-cpu allocator V3 Mel Gorman
2010-08-31 17:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: page allocator: Drain per-cpu lists after direct reclaim allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-08-31 18:26 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-08-23 8:00 [PATCH 0/3] Reduce watermark-related problems with the per-cpu allocator V2 Mel Gorman
2010-08-23 8:00 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: page allocator: Drain per-cpu lists after direct reclaim allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-08-23 23:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-08-16 9:42 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Reduce watermark-related problems with the per-cpu allocator Mel Gorman
2010-08-16 9:42 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: page allocator: Drain per-cpu lists after direct reclaim allocation fails Mel Gorman
2010-08-16 14:50 ` Rik van Riel
2010-08-17 2:57 ` Minchan Kim
2010-08-18 3:02 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-08-19 14:47 ` Minchan Kim
2010-08-19 15:10 ` Mel Gorman
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=20100904075840.GE705@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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).