Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1422459
| From | Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim |
| Date | 2016-06-15 02:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rK7bP-3Jm-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rJuWR-3i5-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <rJyH8-5Np-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi Chen, On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:50:00PM +0800, Chen Feng wrote: > Hi Minchan, > > On 2016/6/13 15:50, Minchan Kim wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1480728 > > > > I sent per-process reclaim patchset three years ago. Then, last > > feedback from akpm was that he want to know real usecase scenario. > > > > Since then, I got question from several embedded people of various > > company "why it's not merged into mainline" and heard they have used > > the feature as in-house patch and recenlty, I noticed android from > > Qualcomm started to use it. > > > > Of course, our product have used it and released it in real procuct. > > > > Quote from Sangwoo Park <angwoo2.park@lge.com> > > Thanks for the data, Sangwoo! > > " > > - Test scenaro > > - platform: android > > - target: MSM8952, 2G DDR, 16G eMMC > > - scenario > > retry app launch and Back Home with 16 apps and 16 turns > > (total app launch count is 256) > > - result: > > resume count | cold launching count > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > vanilla | 85 | 171 > > perproc reclaim | 184 | 72 > > " > > > > Higher resume count is better because cold launching needs loading > > lots of resource data which takes above 15 ~ 20 seconds for some > > games while successful resume just takes 1~5 second. > > > > As perproc reclaim way with new management policy, we could reduce > > cold launching a lot(i.e., 171-72) so that it reduces app startup > > a lot. > > > > Another useful function from this feature is to make swapout easily > > which is useful for testing swapout stress and workloads. > > > Thanks Minchan. > > Yes, this is useful interface when there are memory pressure and let the userspace(Android) > to pick process for reclaim. We also take there series into our platform. > > But I have a question on the reduce app startup time. Can you also share your > theory(management policy) on how can the app reduce it's startup time? What I meant about start-up time is as follows, If a app is killed, it should launch from start so if it was the game app, it should load lots of resource file which takes a long time. However, if the game was not killed, we can enjoy the game without cold start so it is very fast startup. Sorry for confusing.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
[PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-06-13 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 02:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-06-16 13:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-06-16 16:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-17 08:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 09:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-17 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-06-13 19:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] mm: per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 03:10 +0200
[PATCH v1 1/3] mm: vmscan: refactoring force_reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-13 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com> - 2016-06-13 14:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim "ZhaoJunmin Zhao(Junmin)" <zhaojunmin@huawei.com> - 2016-06-13 14:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 02:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-13 15:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-06-15 03:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] per-process reclaim Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@codeaurora.org> - 2016-06-16 06:30 +0200
csiph-web