Re: [PATCH v18 00/32] per memcg lru_lock

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 09-09-20 10:44:32, Aaron Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 09:40:22PM -0400, Daniel Jordan wrote:
> > I went back to your v1 post to see what motivated you originally, and you had
> > some results from aim9 but nothing about where this reared its head in the
> > first place.  How did you discover the bottleneck?  I'm just curious about how
> > lru_lock hurts in practice.
> 
> I think making lru_lock per-memcg helps in colocated environment: some
> workloads are of high priority while some workloads are of low priority.
> 
> For these low priority workloads, we may even want to use some swap for
> it to save memory and this can cause frequent alloc/reclaim, depending
> on its workingset etc. and these alloc/reclaim need to hold the global
> lru lock and zone lock. And then when the high priority workloads do
> page fault, their performance can be adversely affected and that is not
> acceptible since these high priority workloads normally have strict SLA
> requirement.

While this all sounds reasonably. We are lacking _any_ numbers to
actually make that a solid argumentation rather than hand waving.
Having something solid is absolutely necessary for a big change like
this.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs