public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Linux-FSDevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: vmscan: Do not reclaim from lower zones if they are balanced
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 16:32:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140625163250.354f12cd0fa5ff16e32056bf@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1403683129-10814-4-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>

On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:58:46 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:

> Historically kswapd scanned from DMA->Movable in the opposite direction
> to the page allocator to avoid allocating behind kswapd direction of
> progress. The fair zone allocation policy altered this in a non-obvious
> manner.
> 
> Traditionally, the page allocator prefers to use the highest eligible zone
> until the watermark is depleted, woke kswapd and moved onto the next zone.
> kswapd scans zones in the opposite direction so the scanning lists on
> 64-bit look like this;
> 
> ...
>
> Note that this patch makes a large performance difference for lower
> numbers of threads and brings performance closer to 3.0 figures. It was
> also tested against xfs and there are similar gains although I don't have
> 3.0 figures to compare against. There are still regressions for higher
> number of threads but this is related to changes in the CFQ IO scheduler.
> 

Why did this patch make a difference to sequential read performance? 
IOW, by what means was/is reclaim interfering with sequential reads?


  reply	other threads:[~2014-06-25 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-25  7:58 [PATCH 0/6] Improve sequential read throughput v2 Mel Gorman
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm: pagemap: Avoid unnecessary overhead when tracepoints are deactivated Mel Gorman
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 2/6] mm: Rearrange zone fields into read-only, page alloc, statistics and page reclaim lines Mel Gorman
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm: vmscan: Do not reclaim from lower zones if they are balanced Mel Gorman
2014-06-25 23:32   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2014-06-26 10:17     ` Mel Gorman
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm: page_alloc: Reduce cost of the fair zone allocation policy Mel Gorman
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm: page_alloc: Reduce cost of dirty zone balancing Mel Gorman
2014-06-25 23:35   ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-26  8:43     ` Mel Gorman
2014-06-26 14:37       ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-26 14:56         ` Mel Gorman
2014-06-26 15:11           ` Johannes Weiner
2014-06-25  7:58 ` [PATCH 6/6] cfq: Increase default value of target_latency Mel Gorman
2014-06-26 15:36   ` Jeff Moyer
2014-06-26 16:19     ` Mel Gorman
2014-06-26 16:50       ` Jeff Moyer
2014-06-26 17:45         ` Mel Gorman
2014-06-26 18:04           ` Jeff Moyer

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=20140625163250.354f12cd0fa5ff16e32056bf@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    /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