On 09/06/2017 18:59, Tim Chen wrote: > On 06/09/2017 09:35 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: >> On Fri 09-06-17 17:25:51, Laurent Dufour wrote: >> [...] >>> Thanks Michal for your feedback. >>> >>> I mostly focused on this database workload since this is the one where >>> we hit the mmap_sem bottleneck when running on big node. On my usual >>> victim node, I checked for basic usage like kernel build time, but I >>> agree that's clearly not enough. >>> >>> I try to find details about the 'kbench' you mentioned, but I didn't get >>> any valid entry. >>> Would you please point me on this or any other bench tool you think will >>> be useful here ? >> >> Sorry I meant kernbech (aka parallel kernel build). Other highly threaded >> workloads doing a lot of page faults and address space modification >> would be good to see as well. I wish I could give you much more >> comprehensive list but I am not very good at benchmarks. >> > > Laurent, > > Have you tried running the multi-fault microbenchmark by Kamezawa? > It does threaded page faults in parallel. > Peter ran that when he posted his specualtive page faults patches. > https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/6/28 Thanks Tim to remind me about this, I downloaded and built it a time ago and forget about it. I'll give it another try ! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
