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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B0BC3A589 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C821F206DF for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1566297935; bh=MkUD7cGniTgpnelZS0RWQEIGaB0Pe7Up2fGAH52lcrY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=hp6g+ILUymfKSXVPHbLParsiyvCjiKXyM0Y1KkwzdObY1ePfVQp3rq/PnYCvHKI1O GsOu5iV6UaDGue/dJiW1OT1IlCzhkeaF4iyaYH+O9ILn4oK1MtHofwbN1tYt01VUUv JsqYH/3E8nVGsGtzBJB5rKWp3m6FZheKgPKZLJJI= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729650AbfHTKpf (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:35 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38624 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728414AbfHTKpe (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:34 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F2AADD9; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:45:32 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Alex Shi Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Tejun Heo , Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] per memcg lru_lock Message-ID: <20190820104532.GP3111@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1566294517-86418-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1566294517-86418-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 20-08-19 17:48:23, Alex Shi wrote: > This patchset move lru_lock into lruvec, give a lru_lock for each of > lruvec, thus bring a lru_lock for each of memcg. > > Per memcg lru_lock would ease the lru_lock contention a lot in > this patch series. > > In some data center, containers are used widely to deploy different kind > of services, then multiple memcgs share per node pgdat->lru_lock which > cause heavy lock contentions when doing lru operation. Having some real world workloads numbers would be more than useful for a non trivial change like this. I believe googlers have tried something like this in the past but then didn't have really a good example of workloads that benefit. I might misremember though. Cc Hugh. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs