lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: swap: determine swap device by using page nid
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 10:00:59AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 11:24 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 04:34:09PM +0800, ying.huang@intel.com wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2022-04-21 at 16:17 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 03:49:21PM +0800, ying.huang@intel.com wrote:
> >
> > ... ...
> >
> > > > > For swap-in latency, we can use pmbench, which can output latency
> > > > > information.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > OK, I'll give pmbench a run, thanks for the suggestion.
> > >
> > > Better to construct a senario with more swapin than swapout. For
> > > example, start a memory eater, then kill it later.
> >
> > What about vm-scalability/case-swapin?
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/vm-scalability.git/tree/case-swapin
> >
> > I think you are pretty familiar with it but still:
> > 1) it starts $nr_task processes and each mmaps $size/$nr_task area and
> > then consumes the memory, after this, it waits for a signal;
> > 2) start another process to consume $size memory to push the memory in
> > step 1) to swap device;
> > 3) kick processes in step 1) to start accessing their memory, thus
> > trigger swapins. The metric of this testcase is the swapin throughput.
> >
> > I plan to restrict the cgroup's limit to $size.
> >
> > Considering there is only one NVMe drive attached to node 0, I will run
> > the test as described before:
> > 1) bind processes to run on node 0, allocate on node 1 to test the
> > performance when reclaimer's node id is the same as swap device's.
> > 2) bind processes to run on node 1, allocate on node 0 to test the
> > performance when page's node id is the same as swap device's.
> >
> > Ying and Yang,
> >
> > Let me know what you think about the case used and the way the test is
> > conducted.
>
> Looks fine to me. To measure the latency, you could also try the below
> bpftrace script:

Yeah, bpftrace can nicely show us the histogram of the latency.
The hard part is to integrate bpftrace into LKP framework though.

>
> #! /usr/bin/bpftrace
>
> kprobe:swap_readpage
> {
> @start[tid] = nsecs;
> }
>
> kretprobe:swap_readpage
> /@start[tid]/
> {
> @us[comm] = hist((nsecs - @start[tid]) / 1000);
> delete(@start[tid]);
> }

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-04-23 05:23    [W:0.131 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site