OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [RFC][ only for review ] memory controller bacground reclaim [0/5]
Re: [RFC][ only for review ] memory controller bacground reclaim [0/5] (Does anyone have an idea abo [message #23977 is a reply to message #23964] Thu, 29 November 2007 14:42 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Balbir Singh is currently offline  Balbir Singh
Messages: 491
Registered: August 2006
Senior Member
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:49:23 +0900
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi, this set is for memory controller background reclaim.
>>
>> Merged YAMAMOTO-san's version onto 2.6.23-rc3-mm1 + my NUMA patch.
>> And splitted to several sets.
>>
>> Major changes from his one is
>>  - use kthread instead of work_queue
>>  - adjust high/low watermark when limit changes automatically
>>    and set default value. (a user can specify his own later.)
>>
> FYI rather than RFC.
> 
> I wrote attached patch and run kernbench on 8CPU/2Node NUMA/ia64.
> It does make -j 32.
> 
> Memory limitation was 800M. Low/High watermark here was 750M/780M.
> 
> == These numbers are stable to some extent.==
> 2.6.24-rc3-mm2: (Limit: 800M)     
> Average Optimal -j 32 Load Run:
> Elapsed Time 358.933---------------------------(*)
> User Time 1069.63
> System Time 140.667
> Percent CPU 337.333
> Context Switches 220821
> Sleeps 196912
> 
> 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 + throttle (Limit:800M)
> Average Optimal -j 32 Load Run:
> Elapsed Time 266.697---------------------------(*)
> User Time 1105.39
> System Time 124.423
> Percent CPU 471.667
> Context Switches 251797
> Sleeps 231038
> 
> 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 + throttle + High/Low watermark.
> (low:750M High:780M Limit:800M)
> Average Optimal -j 32 Load Run:
> Elapsed Time 266.844---------------------------(*)
> User Time 1112.9
> System Time 112.273
> Percent CPU 473.667
> Context Switches 251795
> Sleeps 220339
> ==
> 

Looks good to me, was there any impact on memory.failcnt?

> Seems throttling reclaim has some good effect (for kernbench).
> Does anyone have an idea for throttling  reclaiming of memory controller ?
> 

In the past I've run workloads of apache+geronimo+open trade, I've run
linear sequential memory access tests, kernbench, lmbench, database
benchmarks (DOTS, pgbench, etc). I think Lee Schermerhorn has a very
interesting setup (that I need to learn to replicate).

> Thanks,
> -Kame
-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH net-2.6.25 2/3][IPV6] Unify and cleanup calls to addrconf_sysctl_register
Next Topic: [PATCH 0/4 net-2.6.15][UNIX] Make unix sysctls per-namespace
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Aug 10 06:55:07 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.24754 seconds