From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0ABC001E0 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BD5A76B00A4; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:21:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B5DDB6B00BA; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:21:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id A73C46B00C0; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:21:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934AB6B00A4 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:21:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8955A40A5E for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:21:37 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81376637034.15.D532BCE Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE58C14000A for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:21:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf09.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=DVzVPUDo; spf=none (imf09.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1698063695; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=f63vhaE1efmEK4fWb2kcm1FrcHOuatkCjbVedihzfzk=; b=rk+Gx1c0x9/m1jovcjyLfO2Lm6onTYPJyvXcMe4iH+8qN/by47ZDkhAIIHBK2W0JG+JE3B 4SGZ2BkfZ8pSbW+p6889SdnZSV6MMVFavdp7En2RPjNEm97FGMeqVjiwhAAyJM5TLcmQbu sYMfu+/cSZx8qboSwMjHTzeBatZ52qw= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1698063695; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=wA4ix1Teqt2MH4SYJ15r3nF8lp5/veLeUBsE4Pb/RSwctwUaJYcNa8UMEjmzXMV3a5C/Me 9qsgVaYejNpXjuja2kKK7Iv4vdeKoWeCJqnkeUYngCdx7zZ7j1mepRpHrfTilpZqNnmd2s Ox6+WP971B7F1Wg7CVD+P8g3oBVFGGg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf09.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=DVzVPUDo; spf=none (imf09.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=f63vhaE1efmEK4fWb2kcm1FrcHOuatkCjbVedihzfzk=; b=DVzVPUDoeCUP0KteB2nk0lddkC kg/v0xFm52dVkSpyTqhjReC6ZG1Z2BfMhHjkD4Uv1HSOCwVCUajeyg7jj8u8GtOVdUh19tUYPgbYA vk6OPc3DEmALdkbbEf7l8sRshEf4YmUuRytHpOlNrd9j2rN8HFgOxnZuOFMn0nw2lHYHQq5qwtM67 9lfzU1M2gUOSo65MP4MODMktiXCy668kN2+YuX2p500Dg/fcQCXbSAATqBu5hU863anT1bak9hDxx W7+x8fmSKP2ylIIe9+S778Gx2wAXyGnb6X7L55euiXF0GFIvqsiyXyyJ+Eyi65HuaRn8yeienjlcS B6x2KVCg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qutvz-00Dk2t-NL; Mon, 23 Oct 2023 12:21:27 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:21:27 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: zhiguojiang Cc: David Hildenbrand , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, opensource.kernel@vivo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm:vmscan: the dirty folio in folio_list skip unmap Message-ID: References: <20231019131446.317-1-justinjiang@vivo.com> <20231019131446.317-2-justinjiang@vivo.com> <2d847d76-2e33-4296-992f-1a6d00c66ff5@redhat.com> <02e73251-33ff-4632-9d2c-bc268f397202@vivo.com> <380bc753-5ee7-4bc7-a76e-a804d5179d87@vivo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <380bc753-5ee7-4bc7-a76e-a804d5179d87@vivo.com> X-Stat-Signature: rfnfghr1uctuerjuba5wqakad7urkbpt X-Rspamd-Server: rspam10 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CE58C14000A X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1698063694-294306 X-HE-Meta: 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 ExFLNb6n pII+Uco5RGSkywRBC0lVtO3+THrIz3tbzx0mP6NoO1/vHCXy5X7XBOmnVvbFtmKj/Nh29v5PrQBg0yINCzEaC8Nah0fOebD6Zd5aiN09iDepMCaBZ8oZJLdlR2/6yxjykOpTCNCXkdL5PzZTG7mmkni20EOdn6far0NQ2nOBuUuZG1+Yffv4CRdkJbQ== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 04:07:28PM +0800, zhiguojiang wrote: > > Are you seeing measurable changes for any workloads? It certainly seems > > like you should, but it would help if you chose a test from mmtests and > > showed how performance changed on your system. > In one mmtest, the max times for a invalid recyling of a folio_list dirty > folio that does not support pageout and has been activated in > shrink_folio_list() are: cost=51us, exe=2365us. > > Calculate according to this formula: dirty_cost / total_cost * 100%, the > recyling efficiency of dirty folios can be improved 53.13%、82.95%. > > So this patch can optimize shrink efficiency and reduce the workload of > kswapd to a certain extent. > > kswapd0-96      (     96) [005] .....   387.218548: > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive: [Justin] nid 0 nr_scanned 32 nr_taken 32 > nr_reclaimed 31 nr_dirty  1 nr_unqueued_dirty  1 nr_writeback 0 > nr_activate[1]  1 nr_ref_keep  0 f RECLAIM_WB_FILE|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC > total_cost 96 total_exe 2365 dirty_cost 51 total_exe 2365 > > kswapd0-96      (     96) [006] .....   412.822532: > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive: [Justin] nid 0 nr_scanned 32 nr_taken 32 > nr_reclaimed  0 nr_dirty 32 nr_unqueued_dirty 32 nr_writeback 0 > nr_activate[1] 19 nr_ref_keep 13 f RECLAIM_WB_FILE|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC > total_cost 88 total_exe 605  dirty_cost 73 total_exe 605 I appreciate that you can put probes in and determine the cost, but do you see improvements for a real workload? Like doing a kernel compile -- does it speed up at all?