Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Introduce a new sysctl knob vm.pcp_batch_scale_max

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 2:44 PM Huang, Ying <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 10:51 AM Huang, Ying <ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >>
> >> > The configuration parameter PCP_BATCH_SCALE_MAX poses challenges for
> >> > quickly experimenting with specific workloads in a production environment,
> >> > particularly when monitoring latency spikes caused by contention on the
> >> > zone->lock. To address this, a new sysctl parameter vm.pcp_batch_scale_max
> >> > is introduced as a more practical alternative.
> >>
> >> In general, I'm neutral to the change.  I can understand that kernel
> >> configuration isn't as flexible as sysctl knob.  But, sysctl knob is ABI
> >> too.
> >>
> >> > To ultimately mitigate the zone->lock contention issue, several suggestions
> >> > have been proposed. One approach involves dividing large zones into multi
> >> > smaller zones, as suggested by Matthew[0], while another entails splitting
> >> > the zone->lock using a mechanism similar to memory arenas and shifting away
> >> > from relying solely on zone_id to identify the range of free lists a
> >> > particular page belongs to[1]. However, implementing these solutions is
> >> > likely to necessitate a more extended development effort.
> >>
> >> Per my understanding, the change will hurt instead of improve zone->lock
> >> contention.  Instead, it will reduce page allocation/freeing latency.
> >
> > I'm quite perplexed by your recent comment. You introduced a
> > configuration that has proven to be difficult to use, and you have
> > been resistant to suggestions for modifying it to a more user-friendly
> > and practical tuning approach. May I inquire about the rationale
> > behind introducing this configuration in the beginning?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand your words.  Do you need me to explain what is
> "neutral"?

No, thanks.
After consulting with ChatGPT, I received a clear and comprehensive
explanation of what "neutral" means, providing me with a better
understanding of the concept.

So, can you explain why you introduced it as a config in the beginning ?

-- 
Regards
Yafang





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux