Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Sep 2002 18:19:36 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] per-zone^Wnode kswapd process |
| |
William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > ... > On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 05:02:56PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Why do I see only one kswapd here? > > Are you claiming an overall 4x improvement, or what? > > I'll add some instrumentation whch tells us how many pages > > kswapd is reclaiming versus direct reclaim. > > I can catch the others running if I refresh more often: > > 38 root 15 0 0 0 0 DW 4.8 0.0 1:57 kswapd0 > 36 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 2.7 0.0 0:16 kswapd2 > > 4779 wli 22 0 4476 3604 1648 R 9.2 0.0 0:58 top > 37 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 2.6 0.0 0:16 kswapd1 > > 38 root 15 0 0 0 0 DW 2.9 0.0 2:12 kswapd0 > 36 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 1.8 0.0 0:22 kswapd2 > > 4779 wli 25 0 4476 3600 1648 R 7.4 0.0 1:18 top > 37 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 2.7 0.0 0:21 kswapd1 > > 4779 wli 24 0 4476 3600 1648 R 37.5 0.0 1:49 top > 37 root 16 0 0 0 0 RW 11.1 0.0 0:23 kswapd1 > > 4779 wli 25 0 4476 3600 1648 R 14.1 0.0 1:51 top > 35 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 6.9 0.0 0:24 kswapd3 > > 38 root 15 0 0 0 0 RW 2.9 0.0 2:29 kswapd0 > 37 root 16 0 0 0 0 SW 1.4 0.0 0:28 kswapd1 > > etc. > > Not sure about baselines. I'm happier because there's more cpu > utilization. kswapd0 is relatively busy so the other ones take some > load off of it. The benchmark isn't quite done yet. I think four > dbench 512's in parallel might be easier to extract results from. > tiobench also looks like it's getting some cpu: >
OK, thanks.
Could you please go into /proc/<pif_of_kswapd>/cpu and double check that each kswapd is only racking up points on the CPUs which it is supposed to be running on? As a little sanity check...
(hm. Why isn't cpus_allowed displayed from in there?)
Also, we need to double check that I'm not completely full of unmentionables, and that kswapd really is doing useful work there. I can check that.
I'll do an mm4 in a mo (as soon as I work out who did the dud patch which stops it booting) and we can see what the kwapd-versus-direct-reclaim ratio looks like. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |