From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@skynet.ie>,
mingo@elte.hu, jschopp@austin.ibm.com, arjan@infradead.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mbligh@mbligh.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation related patches
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 22:51:00 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703012236160.1979@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070302062950.GG15867@wotan.suse.de>
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > There was no talk about slightly. 1G page size would actually be quite
> > convenient for some applications.
>
> But it is far from convenient for the kernel. So we have hugepages, so
> we can stay out of the hair of those applications and they can stay out
> of hours.
Huge pages cannot do I/O so we would get back to the gazillions of pages
to be handled for I/O. I'd love to have I/O support for huge pages. This
would address some of the issues.
> > Writing a terabyte of memory to disk with handling 256 billion page
> > structs? In case of a system with 1 petabyte of memory this may be rather
> > typical and necessary for the application to be able to save its state
> > on disk.
>
> But you will have newer IO controllers, faster CPUs...
Sure we will. And you believe that the the newer controllers will be able
to magically shrink the the SG lists somehow? We will offload the
coalescing of the page structs into bios in hardware or some such thing?
And the vmscans etc too?
> Is it a problem or isn't it? Waving around the 256 billion number isn't
> impressive because it doesn't really say anything.
It is the number of items that needs to be handled by the I/O layer and
likely by the SG engine.
> I understand you have controllers (or maybe it is a block layer limit)
> that doesn't work well with 4K pages, but works OK with 16K pages.
Really? This is the first that I have heard about it.
> This is not something that we would introduce variable sized pagecache
> for, surely.
I am not sure where you get the idea that this is the sole reason why we
need to be able to handle larger contiguous chunks of memory.
How about coming up with a response to the issue at hand? How do I write
back 1 Terabyte effectively? Ok this may be an exotic configuration today
but in one year this may be much more common. Memory sizes keep on
increasing and so is the number of page structs to be handled for I/O. At
some point we need a solution here.
--
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:[~2007-03-02 6:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-01 10:12 The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation related patches Mel Gorman
2007-03-02 0:09 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 0:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-02 1:52 ` Balbir Singh
2007-03-02 3:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-02 3:59 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 5:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-02 5:50 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-03-02 6:15 ` Paul Mundt
2007-03-02 17:01 ` Mel Gorman
2007-03-02 16:20 ` Mark Gross
2007-03-02 17:07 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 17:35 ` Mark Gross
2007-03-02 18:02 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 19:02 ` Mark Gross
2007-03-02 17:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-02 18:45 ` Mark Gross
2007-03-02 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-02 23:58 ` Martin J. Bligh
2007-03-02 4:18 ` Balbir Singh
2007-03-02 5:13 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-03-06 4:16 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-03-02 16:58 ` Mel Gorman
2007-03-02 17:05 ` Joel Schopp
2007-03-05 3:21 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-05 15:20 ` Joel Schopp
2007-03-05 16:01 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-05 16:45 ` Joel Schopp
2007-05-03 8:49 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-03-02 1:39 ` Balbir Singh
2007-03-02 2:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2007-03-02 3:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 3:57 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 4:06 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 4:21 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 4:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 5:06 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 5:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 5:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 5:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 6:08 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 6:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 6:29 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 6:51 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2007-03-02 7:03 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 7:19 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 7:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 8:12 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 8:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 8:38 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-02 17:09 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-04 1:26 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-04 1:51 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-04 1:58 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 5:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 4:29 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 4:33 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 4:58 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 4:20 ` Paul Mundt
2007-03-02 13:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-03-02 15:29 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 16:58 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 17:09 ` Mel Gorman
2007-03-02 17:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 17:35 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 17:43 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 18:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 18:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 18:23 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 18:23 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 19:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 19:40 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 21:12 ` Bill Irwin
2007-03-02 21:19 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 21:52 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 22:03 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 22:22 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 22:34 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 22:51 ` Martin Bligh
2007-03-02 22:54 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-02 23:28 ` Martin J. Bligh
2007-03-03 0:24 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 22:52 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-03-02 22:59 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-02 23:20 ` Rik van Riel
2007-03-03 1:40 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-03 1:58 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-03 3:55 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-03 0:33 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-03 0:54 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-03 3:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-03 4:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-03 17:16 ` Martin J. Bligh
2007-03-03 17:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 20:59 ` Bill Irwin
2007-03-02 1:52 ` Bill Irwin
2007-03-02 10:38 ` Mel Gorman
2007-03-02 16:31 ` Joel Schopp
2007-03-02 21:37 ` Bill Irwin
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0703012236160.1979@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=jschopp@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
--cc=mel@skynet.ie \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).