Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm:vmscan: the dirty folio in folio_list skip unmap

[zhiguojiang]

在 2023/10/23 20:21, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 04:07:28PM +0800, zhiguojiang wrote:
> > > Are you seeing measurable changes for any workloads?  It certainly seems
> > > like you should, but it would help if you chose a test from mmtests and
> > > showed how performance changed on your system.
> > In one mmtest, the max times for a invalid recyling of a folio_list dirty
> > folio that does not support pageout and has been activated in
> > shrink_folio_list() are: cost=51us, exe=2365us.
> >
> > Calculate according to this formula: dirty_cost / total_cost * 100%, the
> > recyling efficiency of dirty folios can be improved 53.13%、82.95%.
> >
> > So this patch can optimize shrink efficiency and reduce the workload of
> > kswapd to a certain extent.
> >
> > kswapd0-96      (     96) [005] .....   387.218548:
> > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive: [Justin] nid 0 nr_scanned 32 nr_taken 32
> > nr_reclaimed 31 nr_dirty  1 nr_unqueued_dirty  1 nr_writeback 0
> > nr_activate[1]  1 nr_ref_keep  0 f RECLAIM_WB_FILE|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC
> > total_cost 96 total_exe 2365 dirty_cost 51 total_exe 2365
> >
> > kswapd0-96      (     96) [006] .....   412.822532:
> > mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_inactive: [Justin] nid 0 nr_scanned 32 nr_taken 32
> > nr_reclaimed  0 nr_dirty 32 nr_unqueued_dirty 32 nr_writeback 0
> > nr_activate[1] 19 nr_ref_keep 13 f RECLAIM_WB_FILE|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC
> > total_cost 88 total_exe 605  dirty_cost 73 total_exe 605
> I appreciate that you can put probes in and determine the cost, but do
> you see improvements for a real workload?  Like doing a kernel compile
> -- does it speed up at all?
Can you help share a method for testing thread workload, like kswapd?

Thanks.