From: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
gregkh@novell.com, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Subject: [PATCH][RFC] mm: make working set portion that is protected tunable v2
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 14:43:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BD58A6C.6040104@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p2y2f11576a1004260459jcaf79962p50e4d29f990019ee@mail.gmail.com>
KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've quick reviewed your patch. but unfortunately I can't write my
> reviewed-by sign.
Not a problem, atm I'm happy about any review and comment :-)
>> Subject: [PATCH][RFC] mm: make working set portion that is protected tunable v2
>> From: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> *updates in v2*
>> - use do_div
>>
>> This patch creates a knob to help users that have workloads suffering from the
>> fix 1:1 active inactive ratio brought into the kernel by "56e49d21 vmscan:
>> evict use-once pages first".
>> It also provides the tuning mechanisms for other users that want an even bigger
>> working set to be protected.
>
> We certainly need no knob. because typical desktop users use various
> application,
> various workload. then, the knob doesn't help them.
Briefly - We had discussed non desktop scenarios where like a day load
that builds up the working set to 50% and a nightly backup job which
then is unable to use that protected 50% when sequentially reading a lot
of disks and due to that doesn't finish before morning.
The knob should help those people that know their system would suffer
from this or similar cases to e.g. set the protected ratio smaller or
even to zero if wanted.
As mentioned before, being able to gain back those protected 50% would
be even better - if it can be done in a way not hurting the original
intention of protecting them.
I personally just don't feel too good knowing that 50% of my memory
might hang around unused for many hours while they could be of some use.
I absolutely agree with the old intention and see how the patch helped
with the latency issue Elladan brought up in the past - but it just
looks way too aggressive to protect it "forever" for some server use cases.
> Probably, I've missed previous discussion. I'm going to find your previous mail.
The discussion ends at http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/22/38 - feel free to
click through it.
--
Grusse / regards, Christian Ehrhardt
IBM Linux Technology Center, System z Linux Performance
--
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:[~2010-04-26 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-08 11:48 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Avoid the use of congestion_wait under zone pressure Mel Gorman
2010-03-08 11:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] page-allocator: Under memory pressure, wait on pressure to relieve instead of congestion Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 13:35 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 14:17 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 15:03 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 15:42 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-09 18:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-10 2:38 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 17:35 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-10 2:35 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 15:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 15:56 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-09 16:09 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 17:01 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 17:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-09 17:30 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-08 11:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] page-allocator: Check zone pressure when batch of pages are freed Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 9:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 10:08 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 10:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 10:36 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 11:11 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 11:29 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-08 11:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] vmscan: Put kswapd to sleep on its own waitqueue, not congestion Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 10:00 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-09 10:21 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-09 10:32 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-11 23:41 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] Avoid the use of congestion_wait under zone pressure Andrew Morton
2010-03-12 6:39 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-12 7:05 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-12 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-12 12:15 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-12 14:37 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-15 12:29 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-15 14:45 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-15 12:34 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-15 20:09 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-16 10:11 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-18 17:42 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-22 23:50 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-23 14:35 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-03-23 21:35 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-24 11:48 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 12:56 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2010-03-23 22:29 ` Rik van Riel
2010-03-24 14:50 ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-19 12:22 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-19 21:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2010-04-20 7:20 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-20 8:54 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-20 15:32 ` Johannes Weiner
2010-04-20 17:22 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-21 4:23 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-21 7:35 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-21 13:19 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-22 6:21 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-26 10:59 ` Subject: [PATCH][RFC] mm: make working set portion that is protected tunable v2 Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-26 11:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-26 12:43 ` Christian Ehrhardt [this message]
2010-04-26 14:20 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-27 14:00 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-21 9:03 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] Avoid the use of congestion_wait under zone pressure Johannes Weiner
2010-04-21 13:20 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-20 14:40 ` Rik van Riel
2010-03-24 2:38 ` Greg KH
2010-03-24 11:49 ` Mel Gorman
2010-03-24 13:13 ` Johannes Weiner
2010-03-12 9:09 ` 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=4BD58A6C.6040104@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@novell.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=riel@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).