From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: don't call mmu_shrinker w/o used_mmu_pages
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 12:04:35 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F93C9A3.40107@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120420151143.433c514e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On 04/21/2012 01:11 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:38:41 -0700
> Ying Han <yinghan@google.com> wrote:
>
> > The mmu_shrink() is heavy by itself by iterating all kvms and holding
> > the kvm_lock. spotted the code w/ Rik during LSF, and it turns out we
> > don't need to call the shrinker if nothing to shrink.
> >
>
> We should probably tell the kvm maintainers about this ;)
>
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -188,6 +188,11 @@ static u64 __read_mostly shadow_mmio_mask;
> >
> > static void mmu_spte_set(u64 *sptep, u64 spte);
> >
> > +static inline int get_kvm_total_used_mmu_pages()
> > +{
> > + return percpu_counter_read_positive(&kvm_total_used_mmu_pages);
> > +}
> > +
> > void kvm_mmu_set_mmio_spte_mask(u64 mmio_mask)
> > {
> > shadow_mmio_mask = mmio_mask;
> > @@ -3900,6 +3905,9 @@ static int mmu_shrink(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> > if (nr_to_scan == 0)
> > goto out;
> >
> > + if (!get_kvm_total_used_mmu_pages())
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > raw_spin_lock(&kvm_lock);
> >
> > list_for_each_entry(kvm, &vm_list, vm_list) {
> > @@ -3926,7 +3934,7 @@ static int mmu_shrink(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc)
> > raw_spin_unlock(&kvm_lock);
> >
> > out:
> > - return percpu_counter_read_positive(&kvm_total_used_mmu_pages);
> > + return get_kvm_total_used_mmu_pages();
> > }
> >
> > static struct shrinker mmu_shrinker = {
>
> There's a small functional change: percpu_counter_read_positive() is an
> approximate thing, so there will be cases where there will be some
> pages which are accounted for only in the percpu_counter's per-cpu
> accumulators. In that case mmu_shrink() will bale out when there are
> in fact some freeable pages available. This is hopefully unimportant.
>
> Do we actually know that this patch helps anything? Any measurements? Is
> kvm_total_used_mmu_pages==0 at all common?
>
It's very common - this corresponds to the case where the kvm module is
loaded but no virtual machines are present. But in that case the
shrinker loop is not at all heavy - take a lock, iterate over an empty
list, release lock.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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 prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-22 9:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-13 22:38 [PATCH] kvm: don't call mmu_shrinker w/o used_mmu_pages Ying Han
2012-04-14 11:44 ` Hillf Danton
2012-04-16 16:43 ` Ying Han
2012-04-20 22:11 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-20 22:53 ` Rik van Riel
2012-04-20 23:07 ` Ying Han
2012-04-21 1:56 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-21 2:15 ` Mike Waychison
2012-04-21 2:29 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-21 2:48 ` Mike Waychison
2012-04-22 9:16 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-22 19:05 ` Eric Northup
2012-04-23 8:37 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-22 9:04 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2012-04-22 9:35 ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-23 16:40 ` Ying Han
2012-04-23 16:48 ` Rik van Riel
2012-04-23 16:57 ` Avi Kivity
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=4F93C9A3.40107@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=dhillf@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghan@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).