lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subjectext4 extent status tree LRU locking
I've got a test case which I intended to use to stress the VM a bit.  It
fills memory up with page cache a couple of times. It essentially runs
30 or so cp's in parallel.

98% of my CPU is system time, and 96% of _that_ is being spent on the
spinlock in ext4_es_lru_add(). I think the LRU list head and its lock
end up being *REALLY* hot cachelines and are *the* bottleneck on this
test. Note that this is _before_ we go in to reclaim and actually start
calling in to the shrinker. There is zero memory pressure in this test.

I'm not sure the benefits of having a proper in-order LRU during reclaim
outweigh such a drastic downside for the common case.

Any thoughts?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-12 01:41    [W:0.102 / U:0.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site