From: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
To: "Nicolas Frattaroli" <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>,
"Boris Brezillon" <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>,
"Liviu Dudau" <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Let userspace explicitly trigger memory reclaims
Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 16:06:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <829b8887-48de-4cfa-8bb2-79db1471bb8d@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260506-panthor-explicit-reclaim-v1-0-44f82ac147ce@collabora.com>
On 06/05/2026 11:45, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> RAM is not, in fact, cheap. Especially on embedded systems with a low
> amount of memory, but known and well-defined userspace, more explicit
> resource management can lead to better utilisation patterns. As an
> example, a resource manager process on a purpose-built device may wish
> to launch, and then explicitly swap out, memory of processes that are
> kept "warm", to improve perceived startup latency of individual
> full-screen applications without making the kernel figure out the usage
> pattern from observation alone in order to swap out the right pages.
Have you considered memory control groups (memcg) for this purpose?
Imposing a lower limit than currently allocated should trigger reclaim,
so 'background' applications could have the limit lowered and then
restored when moved to the foreground.
> To allow for this explicit control in the context of panthor's GPU
> memory, add two new sysfs knobs. The first, mem_reclaim, runs an
> explicit priv BO reclaim cycle on the TGID written to it.
>
> The second, mem_claim, does the opposite: it swaps BOs back into active
> memory.
How necessary is this mem_claim for performance? Have you done any
benchmarking of explicitly claiming vs just allowing it to happen
naturally? My gut feeling is that mem_claim should be unnecessary in
most situations, but I'm prepared to be proved wrong.
I'm not saying this series is necessarily the wrong approach - but I
think we need a bit more justification for adding a new API for this.
Thanks,
Steve
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
> ---
> Nicolas Frattaroli (4):
> drm/panthor: Add freed_sz parameter to reclaim_priv_bos
> MAINTAINERS: Add sysfs ABI docs to list of panthor files
> drm/panthor: Add explicit memory reclaim sysfs knob
> drm/panthor: Add explicit memory claim sysfs knob
>
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-driver-panthor-mem | 34 ++++++++
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_drv.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gem.c | 7 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_gem.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_mmu.c | 70 +++++++++++++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_mmu.h | 4 +
> 7 files changed, 205 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 2c4b906cd135bbb44855287d0d0eff0ee0b47afe
> change-id: 20260506-panthor-explicit-reclaim-3dffed028d8c
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-06 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-06 10:45 [PATCH 0/4] Let userspace explicitly trigger memory reclaims Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 10:45 ` [PATCH 1/4] drm/panthor: Add freed_sz parameter to reclaim_priv_bos Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 15:06 ` Steven Price
2026-05-06 15:19 ` Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 10:45 ` [PATCH 2/4] MAINTAINERS: Add sysfs ABI docs to list of panthor files Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 10:45 ` [PATCH 3/4] drm/panthor: Add explicit memory reclaim sysfs knob Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 10:45 ` [PATCH 4/4] drm/panthor: Add explicit memory claim " Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 15:06 ` Steven Price [this message]
2026-05-06 15:43 ` [PATCH 0/4] Let userspace explicitly trigger memory reclaims Nicolas Frattaroli
2026-05-06 15:55 ` Steven Price
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=829b8887-48de-4cfa-8bb2-79db1471bb8d@arm.com \
--to=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=tzimmermann@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