From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@us.ibm.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch] Scale pidhash_shift/pidhash_size up based on num_possible_cpus().
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 14:13:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080801191336.GK10501@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1proszj3r.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 11:27:20AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 03:04:56PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > Like so???
> >> >
> >> > I have not tested this yet.
> >>
> >> Looks reasonable to me.
> >>
> >> In what circumstances was the lookup in the pid hash table with
> >> long changes causing a performance slowdown?. We don't perform
> >> a lot of lookups.
> >
> > It was initially detected while profiling 'ps' on a 2048p machine that
> > had 13 kernel threads per cpu. We added a couple more device drivers
> > which added additional threads. We then started a pthread-on-process
> > MPI job which had 2048 ranks each with 4 threads (test-case from
> > customer job). There were misc other processes out there which brought
> > our task count up to approx 63k. Larger page size helped the problem
> > (went from 16k to 64k).
>
> Large page size? Do you mean larger hash size?
>
> What were you measuring that showed improvement with the large hash size?
Oops, confusing details. That was a different problem we had been
tracking.
Sorry for the confusion,
Robin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-01 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-31 17:00 [Patch] Scale pidhash_shift/pidhash_size up based on num_possible_cpus() Robin Holt
2008-07-31 18:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-31 19:32 ` Robin Holt
2008-07-31 19:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-31 20:08 ` Robin Holt
2008-07-31 22:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-01 12:04 ` Robin Holt
2008-08-01 18:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-01 19:13 ` Robin Holt [this message]
2008-08-01 19:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-04 13:11 ` Stephen Champion
2008-08-04 20:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-04 23:58 ` Robin Holt
2008-08-05 0:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-06 3:21 ` Stephen Champion
2008-08-01 18:49 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20080801191336.GK10501@sgi.com \
--to=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=sukadev@us.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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