From: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v9 PATCH 13/13] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:01:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHbLzkrju=bYk3mrBUxhL8uq9Q=H0Nw4dqD3sDx8G7AJY-n=Wg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALvZod5B+JZT2WK=_fKH7tfpXG=NLhwhN=Y83y4+HmsG8TT2LA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:41 PM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:41 PM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 1:08 PM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:54 AM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:24 AM Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 9:46 AM Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The number of deferred objects might get windup to an absurd number, and it
> > > > > > results in clamp of slab objects. It is undesirable for sustaining workingset.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So shrink deferred objects proportional to priority and cap nr_deferred to twice
> > > > > > of cache items.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The idea is borrowed from Dave Chinner's patch:
> > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20191031234618.15403-13-david@fromorbit.com/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tested with kernel build and vfs metadata heavy workload in our production
> > > > > > environment, no regression is spotted so far.
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you run both of these workloads in the same cgroup or separate cgroups?
> > > >
> > > > Both are covered.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Have you tried just this patch i.e. without the first 12 patches?
> >
> > No. It could be applied without the first 12 patches, but I didn't
> > test this combination specifically since I don't think it would have
> > any difference from with the first 12 patches. I tested running the
> > test case under root memcg, it seems equal to w/o the first 12 patches
> > and the only difference is where to get nr_deferred.
>
> I am trying to measure the impact of this patch independently. One
> point I can think of is the global reclaim. The first 12 patches do
> not aim to improve the global reclaim but this patch will. I am just
> wondering what would be negative if any of this patch.
Feel free to do so. More tests from more workloads are definitely
appreciated. That could give us more confidence about this patch or
catch regression sooner.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-10 23:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-10 17:45 [v9 PATCH 00/13] Make shrinker's nr_deferred memcg aware Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 01/13] mm: vmscan: use nid from shrink_control for tracepoint Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 02/13] mm: vmscan: consolidate shrinker_maps handling code Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 03/13] mm: vmscan: use shrinker_rwsem to protect shrinker_maps allocation Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 04/13] mm: vmscan: remove memcg_shrinker_map_size Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 05/13] mm: vmscan: use kvfree_rcu instead of call_rcu Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 06/13] mm: memcontrol: rename shrinker_map to shrinker_info Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 07/13] mm: vmscan: add shrinker_info_protected() helper Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 08/13] mm: vmscan: use a new flag to indicate shrinker is registered Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:45 ` [v9 PATCH 09/13] mm: vmscan: add per memcg shrinker nr_deferred Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:46 ` [v9 PATCH 10/13] mm: vmscan: use per memcg nr_deferred of shrinker Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:46 ` [v9 PATCH 11/13] mm: vmscan: don't need allocate shrinker->nr_deferred for memcg aware shrinkers Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:46 ` [v9 PATCH 12/13] mm: memcontrol: reparent nr_deferred when memcg offline Yang Shi
2021-03-10 17:46 ` [v9 PATCH 13/13] mm: vmscan: shrink deferred objects proportional to priority Yang Shi
2021-03-10 18:24 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 18:24 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 18:54 ` Yang Shi
2021-03-10 18:54 ` Yang Shi
2021-03-10 21:08 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 21:08 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 21:41 ` Yang Shi
2021-03-10 21:41 ` Yang Shi
2021-03-10 22:40 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 22:40 ` Shakeel Butt
2021-03-10 23:01 ` Yang Shi [this message]
2021-03-10 23:01 ` Yang Shi
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='CAHbLzkrju=bYk3mrBUxhL8uq9Q=H0Nw4dqD3sDx8G7AJY-n=Wg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.