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=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,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 9BE5EC433E2 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 02:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9D420EDD for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 02:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="AnELXMNt" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2B9D420EDD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 5C0276B0072; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 54A166B0073; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:44:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3C3426B0074; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:44:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0164.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.164]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F8166B0072 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67993626 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 02:44:43 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77241980046.15.bell38_0008ad9270d9 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE81A1814B0C1 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 02:44:43 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: bell38_0008ad9270d9 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4769 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com (mail-pg1-f194.google.com [209.85.215.194]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 02:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id 34so940301pgo.13 for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 19:44:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0ZdmUVaaik0Cd28h3Zbe2m43Ssgf1GR/sAhP0i4ZEkE=; b=AnELXMNtpHPPvFIglx8F3SVHWevil/Qj/z/vpbBRAvIn5Z+8QZvRRdtDrnet3+bsLM 5mCLGxCFpyFhqz95Hx4U4HTvz5lQjzyhOuSdSEsfTMrNQimYLdlqYew1C5g66rd5/su2 CNH0k30TqQpa5zqkDQirUnbrGnTL0LJeLOdkLsfi2Z7BI4YZu/TDAbvV38KLLXcrhNH6 zfotW278dwua1xutDu6WQ4z4I55XsYNz9vIlb2ToKsKtYIXaTYjXBj6Dr7qzfXmWutZN ZY89N3EA5hpaqooLt1MKRRrIEkQhWYLwuREAdK6vuhA2hQvMXg+kaJBSOiAgPVm5ebo/ hrTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0ZdmUVaaik0Cd28h3Zbe2m43Ssgf1GR/sAhP0i4ZEkE=; b=fE5yY2ipcOFg4NQh0G6fF301gULv9AIWWtZVq7bSGWPStWvmGFLI3SLP7dN2PeAizM Isb9LTaHBkdcvtQcgV3razXM9zwheWi6Z1mprn6bGf9/ErsFQg0dOj6Sj+eaY0PpYG50 8REFo8xF6NKVylIWtsz+koojFPe4Hff5sw7AtfHmAHeYMO71raJOcfzl4BQrzxzYh1jp Ny03DZdHKQ6H/4/i62zNbGEwe+TMk8xKs96jJgHIlW6EhYkT9NHTDCmmvLc2Gg+b8yz5 mHDaa70bsOiRuSyiY2Iry2HfDvlndl9qAo47hmT7Wv4gma3rcuwxSXyzFbE+sPUhpMRS N8Yw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530fkgVs4qV+0dFSrHEcmXlew3kUAq8NV7Ji6xC5TtDreicyZU+Y OoQGlq402zrBeOJW6nxYwS4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy4R6mz9uYwCQ+w3R9a2nnsXjsgw2amLudcvUNkXcUDKVv/IUKrWuLgI1C9iMeS6XgZAub9AQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:110c:: with SMTP id g12mr1261586pgl.91.1599619482359; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 19:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from desktop-ziqianlu ([47.89.83.67]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m190sm684741pfm.184.2020.09.08.19.44.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Sep 2020 19:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 10:44:32 +0800 From: Aaron Lu To: Daniel Jordan Cc: Alex Shi , Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , mgorman@techsingularity.net, tj@kernel.org, khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru, willy@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, lkp@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, shakeelb@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, richard.weiyang@gmail.com, kirill@shutemov.name, alexander.duyck@gmail.com, rong.a.chen@intel.com, mhocko@suse.com, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, shy828301@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/32] per memcg lru_lock Message-ID: <20200909024432.GA9736@desktop-ziqianlu> References: <1598273705-69124-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <20200824114204.cc796ca182db95809dd70a47@linux-foundation.org> <20200825015627.3c3pnwauqznnp3gc@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com> <20200826011946.spknwjt44d2szrdo@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com> <01ed6e45-3853-dcba-61cb-b429a49a7572@linux.alibaba.com> <20200828014022.y5xju6weysqpzxd2@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200828014022.y5xju6weysqpzxd2@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AE81A1814B0C1 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 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 Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 09:40:22PM -0400, Daniel Jordan wrote: > I went back to your v1 post to see what motivated you originally, and you had > some results from aim9 but nothing about where this reared its head in the > first place. How did you discover the bottleneck? I'm just curious about how > lru_lock hurts in practice. I think making lru_lock per-memcg helps in colocated environment: some workloads are of high priority while some workloads are of low priority. For these low priority workloads, we may even want to use some swap for it to save memory and this can cause frequent alloc/reclaim, depending on its workingset etc. and these alloc/reclaim need to hold the global lru lock and zone lock. And then when the high priority workloads do page fault, their performance can be adversely affected and that is not acceptible since these high priority workloads normally have strict SLA requirement.