From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Convert khugepaged to a task_work function
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 11:39:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <544FB8A8.1090402@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <544F9302.4010001@redhat.com>
On 10/28/2014 08:58 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 10/28/2014 08:12 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> writes:
>>
>>> Last week, while discussing possible fixes for some unexpected/unwanted behavior
>>> from khugepaged (see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/8/515) several people
>>> mentioned possibly changing changing khugepaged to work as a task_work function
>>> instead of a kernel thread. This will give us finer grained control over the
>>> page collapse scans, eliminate some unnecessary scans since tasks that are
>>> relatively inactive will not be scanned often, and eliminate the unwanted
>>> behavior described in the email thread I mentioned.
>>
>> With your change, what would happen in a single threaded case?
>>
>> Previously one core would scan and another would run the workload.
>> With your change both scanning and running would be on the same
>> core.
>>
>> Would seem like a step backwards to me.
>
> It's not just scanning, either.
>
> Memory compaction can spend a lot of time waiting on
> locks. Not consuming CPU or anything, but just waiting.
>
> I am not convinced that moving all that waiting to task
> context is a good idea.
It may be worth investigating how the hugepage code calls
the memory allocation & compaction code.
Doing only async compaction from task_work context should
probably be ok.
--
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:[~2014-10-28 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-23 2:49 [PATCH 0/4] Convert khugepaged to a task_work function Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 2:49 ` [PATCH 1/4] Disable khugepaged thread Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 2:49 ` [PATCH] Add pgcollapse controls to task_struct Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 15:29 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 2:49 ` [PATCH 3/4] Convert khugepaged scan functions to work with task_work Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 2:49 ` [PATCH 4/4] Add /proc files to expose per-mm pgcollapse stats Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 3:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add pgcollapse stat counter to task_struct Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 3:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] Add /proc files to expose per-mm pgcollapse stats Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 17:55 ` [PATCH 0/4] Convert khugepaged to a task_work function Rik van Riel
2014-10-23 18:05 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-10-23 18:52 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-10-28 12:12 ` Andi Kleen
2014-10-28 12:58 ` Rik van Riel
2014-10-28 15:39 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2014-10-31 20:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-17 21:34 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-11-10 11:03 ` Mel Gorman
2014-11-17 21:16 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-10-29 21:58 ` Alex Thorlton
2014-10-30 0:23 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2014-10-30 8:35 ` Andi Kleen
2014-10-30 18:25 ` Alex Thorlton
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=544FB8A8.1090402@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=athorlton@sgi.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lliubbo@gmail.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vdavydov@parallels.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).