lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable
I've been playing with 2.4.18 with the following primary patches with
very good results:

O(1)-K3
Andrew Morton's low-latency and read-latency2
Martin's vmscan patch

In the past, I've been applying low-latency without enabling the CONFIG
option, silly me. Why haven't Andrew's low latency patches gone into
2.4 or 2.5? Let's pretty please with sugar on top and a cherry get
those into 2.4.19 even if -aa doesn't make it -- it's making a world of
difference in the stuff I'm throwing at the kernel, and I'm thinking -aa
and -rmap are giving improvements partially because they incorporate
some of these changes.

I think adding 10_vm would put the finishing touch on bridging the gap until
2.5, IMHO. O(1) would just be the proverbial icing on the cake at a later
stage, since there still seems to be some work left to do on it (per-CPU
stuff?).

Now if TUX2 would only stop going into 99% CPU mode. ;)
--
Ken.
brownfld@irridia.com

On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 06:09:34PM -0600, Ken Brownfield wrote:
| On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 03:51:43AM -0800, Aviv Shavit wrote:
| | Ken Brownfield's A) and B) hit me
| | regularly(http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0201.0/0740.html)
| | (Thanks Ken for starting this enlightening thread and
| | to all those that contributed)
|
| No problem. You might be coming in late, but nothing's changed. :-/
| Although the APIC thing might be MPS1.4 related, I'm finding. I don't
| remember if that thread had my workaround to the APIC issue, so I'll
| attach that if you're feeling adventurous. Works flawlessly for me in
| production, for the last few months.
|
| | Running software I developed:
| | - running on 2.4.17
| | - accessing a large number of files
| | - 2GB memory
| | - large multiple partitions - ext2
| |
| | I saw references to patches by Martin and
| | M.H.vanLeeuwen on this thread. Where can I get those
| | (hopefully with a bit of info) ?
|
| I've attached his patch; hopefully he doesn't mind. His patch is
| actually similar to code that's in rmap currently.
|
| It does seem to temper the effects of [id]cache bloat for some of my
| more common load patterns. But even with that patch, under VM load the
| mainline kernel collapses. For instance, I have a large parallel task
| that takes 5 minutes under -rmap or -aa, but I get bored and kill it
| after 4 *hours* on mainline. It dips into swap, but only by about 50MB.
|
| Also, -aa doesn't seem to make as large an impact on shrinking the
| [id]caches. I imagine that without returning values,
| shrink_[id]cache_memory() behavior is difficult to tune appropriately.
|
| In any case, rmap-12f has been running fine for me. I'm going to create
| three kernels to distribute in production -- 2.4.18 more or less
| vanilla, 2.4.18 with random debugging (thanks Andreas) to try to resolve
| the /dev/random death issue, and 2.4.18+O(1)K3+rmap12f.
|
| rmap is a tremendous improvement over mainline -- really the only data I
| still need is stability, both of O(1) and rmap. Porting Andrea's 10_vm
| was a pain the last time I did it, and it didn't have all of the
| positives of rmap.
|
| Clearly I'm not in the majority, though. While I get bitten on a weekly
| basis by the 2.4 VM, very few other people mention it. Maybe they just
| assume that it's normal behavior? Scary.
|
| Anyway, short of the long is that I would suggest rmap if you're having
| problems. Rmap actually obviates three other patches I typically apply.
| But be aware that rmap is still a bit of a work in progress, at least in
| terms of tuning.
|
| Cheers,
| --
| Ken.
| brownfld@irridia.com
|
|
| | I also saw references to 'rmap' on the 2.4.18
| | changelog. Is that related ?
| |
| | pls. cc' me on your posts back.
| |
| | Thanks
| | Aviv
| |
| | "And all this science I don't understand,
| | It's just my job five days a week"
| | Rocket Man, E.J.
|
|
| --- linux.virgin/mm/vmscan.c Mon Dec 31 12:46:25 2001
| +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c Fri Jan 11 18:03:05 2002
| @@ -394,9 +394,9 @@
| if (PageDirty(page) && is_page_cache_freeable(page) && page->mapping) {
| /*
| * It is not critical here to write it only if
| - * the page is unmapped beause any direct writer
| + * the page is unmapped because any direct writer
| * like O_DIRECT would set the PG_dirty bitflag
| - * on the phisical page after having successfully
| + * on the physical page after having successfully
| * pinned it and after the I/O to the page is finished,
| * so the direct writes to the page cannot get lost.
| */
| @@ -480,11 +480,14 @@
|
| /*
| * Alert! We've found too many mapped pages on the
| - * inactive list, so we start swapping out now!
| + * inactive list.
| + * Move referenced pages to the active list.
| */
| - spin_unlock(&pagemap_lru_lock);
| - swap_out(priority, gfp_mask, classzone);
| - return nr_pages;
| + if (PageReferenced(page) && !PageLocked(page)) {
| + del_page_from_inactive_list(page);
| + add_page_to_active_list(page);
| + }
| + continue;
| }
|
| /*
| @@ -521,6 +524,9 @@
| }
| spin_unlock(&pagemap_lru_lock);
|
| + if (max_mapped <= 0 && (nr_pages > 0 || priority < DEF_PRIORITY))
| + swap_out(priority, gfp_mask, classzone);
| +
| return nr_pages;
| }
|
| -
| 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/
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:20    [W:0.112 / U:0.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site