On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 13:09 +0800, Ric Mason wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> On 04/30/2013 01:12 AM, Tim Chen wrote:
> > Currently the per cpu counter's batch size for memory accounting is
> > configured as twice the number of cpus in the system. However,
> > for system with very large memory, it is more appropriate to make it
> > proportional to the memory size per cpu in the system.
> >
> > For example, for a x86_64 system with 64 cpus and 128 GB of memory,
> > the batch size is only 2*64 pages (0.5 MB). So any memory accounting
> > changes of more than 0.5MB will overflow the per cpu counter into
> > the global counter. Instead, for the new scheme, the batch size
> > is configured to be 0.4% of the memory/cpu = 8MB (128 GB/64 /256),
>
> If large batch size will lead to global counter more inaccurate?
>
I've kept the error tolerance fairly small (0.4%), so it should not be
an issue.
If this is a concern, we can switch to percpu_counter_compare that will
use the global counter quick compare and switch to accurate compare if
needed (like the following).
index d1e4124..c78be36 100644
--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ int __vm_enough_memory(struct mm_struct *mm, long pages, int cap_sys_admin)
if (mm)
allowed -= mm->total_vm / 32;
- if (percpu_counter_read_positive(&vm_committed_as) < allowed)
+ if (percpu_counter_compare(&vm_committed_as, allowed) < 0)
return 0;
error:
vm_unacct_memory(pages);
Tim
--
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>