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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=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 5EBF9C3A59E for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 397162082F for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 397162082F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id CEAA56B0007; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C9A9B6B0008; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id BB1536B000A; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0119.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.119]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C506B0007 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 06:45:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4B29B8138 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:35 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75842475030.10.cry54_880d2514c5938 X-HE-Tag: cry54_880d2514c5938 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1893 Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by imf46.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:45:34 +0000 (UTC) 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) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: 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