Re: Page allocator order-0 optimizations merged
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-28 08:29:18
Also in:
linux-mm
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:32:19 +0300 Tariq Toukan [off-list ref] wrote:
On 27/03/2017 4:32 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:quoted
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:39:47PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:quoted
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:55:14 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
A possible solution, would be use the local_bh_{disable,enable} instead of the {preempt_disable,enable} calls. But it is slower, using numbers from [1] (19 vs 11 cycles), thus the expected cycles saving is 38-19=19. The problematic part of using local_bh_enable is that this adds a softirq/bottom-halves rescheduling point (as it checks for pending BHs). Thus, this might affects real workloads.I implemented this solution in patch below... and tested it on mlx5 at 50G with manually disabled driver-page-recycling. It works for me. To Mel, that do you prefer... a partial-revert or something like this?If Tariq confirms it works for him as well, this looks far safer patchGreat. I will test Jesper's patch today in the afternoon.
Good to hear :-)
quoted
than having a dedicate IRQ-safe queue. Your concern about the BH scheduling point is valid but if it's proven to be a problem, there is still the option of a partial revert.
I wanted to evaluate my own BH scheduling point concern, but I could not, because I ran into a softirq acct regression (which I bisected see[1]). AFAIK this should not affect Tariq's multi-TCP-stream test (netperf TCP stream testing works fine on my testlab). [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170328101403.34a82fbf@redhat.com -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>