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
==

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

Thanks,
-Kame
==
Just and Experimental. add throttling at starting direct reclaim.


 mm/memcontrol.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6.24-rc3-mm2/mm/memcontrol.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.24-rc3-mm2.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc3-mm2/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ struct mem_cgroup {
 
 	unsigned long control_type;	/* control RSS or RSS+Pagecache */
 	int	prev_priority;	/* for recording reclaim priority */
+	atomic_t	reclaimers; /* # of processes which calls reclaim */
 	/*
 	 * statistics.
 	 */
@@ -635,14 +636,27 @@ retry:
 	 */
 	while (res_counter_charge(&mem->res, PAGE_SIZE)) {
 		bool is_atomic = gfp_mask & GFP_ATOMIC;
+		int limit;
 		/*
 		 * We cannot reclaim under GFP_ATOMIC, fail the charge
 		 */
 		if (is_atomic)
 			goto noreclaim;
-
-		if (try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(mem, gfp_mask))
-			continue;
+		/*
+		 * Experimental: 
+		 * Obviously, we need some throttling here.
+		 */
+		limit = num_online_cpus()/4 + 1;
+		if (atomic_add_unless(&mem->reclaimers, 1, limit)) {
+			if (try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(mem, gfp_mask)) {
+				atomic_dec(&mem->reclaimers);
+				continue;
+			}
+			atomic_dec(&mem->reclaimers);
+		} else {
+			yield();
+			nr_retries++;
+		}
 
 		/*
  		 * try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages() might not give us a full
@@ -1168,7 +1182,7 @@ mem_cgroup_create(struct cgroup_subsys *
 
 	mem->control_type = MEM_CGROUP_TYPE_ALL;
 	memset(&mem->info, 0, sizeof(mem->info));
-
+	atomic_set(&mem->reclaimers, 0);
 	for_each_node_state(node, N_POSSIBLE)
 		if (alloc_mem_cgroup_per_zone_info(mem, node))
 			goto free_out;





_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers