Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1538423
| From | Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 |
| Date | 2016-12-08 11:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sM4qZ-54M-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <sLQR3-4Lk-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sLRWO-5ns-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <sLTOV-6J2-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <sM2fv-3Ni-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <sM31T-4kE-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 09:18:06 +0000 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 09:22:31AM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 23:25:31 +0000 > > Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 09:19:58PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > At small packet sizes on localhost, I see relatively low page allocator > > > > activity except during the socket setup and other unrelated activity > > > > (khugepaged, irqbalance, some btrfs stuff) which is curious as it's > > > > less clear why the performance was improved in that case. I considered > > > > the possibility that it was cache hotness of pages but that's not a > > > > good fit. If it was true then the first test would be slow and the rest > > > > relatively fast and I'm not seeing that. The other side-effect is that > > > > all the high-order pages that are allocated at the start are physically > > > > close together but that shouldn't have that big an impact. So for now, > > > > the gain is unexplained even though it happens consistently. > > > > > > > > > > Further investigation led me to conclude that the netperf automation on > > > my side had some methodology errors that could account for an artifically > > > low score in some cases. The netperf automation is years old and would > > > have been developed against a much older and smaller machine which may be > > > why I missed it until I went back looking at exactly what the automation > > > was doing. Minimally in a server/client test on remote maching there was > > > potentially higher packet loss than is acceptable. This would account why > > > some machines "benefitted" while others did not -- there would be boot to > > > boot variations that some machines happened to be "lucky". I believe I've > > > corrected the errors, discarded all the old data and scheduled a rest to > > > see what falls out. > > > > I guess you are talking about setting the netperf socket queue low > > (+256 bytes above msg size), that I pointed out in[1]. > > Primarily, yes. > > > From the same commit[2] I can see you explicitly set (local+remote): > > > > sysctl net.core.rmem_max=16777216 > > sysctl net.core.wmem_max=16777216 > > > > Yes, I set it for higher speed networks as a starting point to remind me > to examine rmem_default or socket configurations if any significant packet > loss is observed. > > > Eric do you have any advice on this setting? > > > > And later[4] you further increase this to 32MiB. Notice that the > > netperf UDP_STREAM test will still use the default value from: > > net.core.rmem_default = 212992. > > > > That's expected. In the initial sniff-test, I saw negligible packet loss. > I'm waiting to see what the full set of network tests look like before > doing any further adjustments. For netperf I will not recommend adjusting the global default /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_default as netperf have means of adjusting this value from the application (which were the options you setup too low and just removed). I think you should keep this as the default for now (unless Eric says something else), as this should cover most users. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 11:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-12-07 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-12-07 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-12-07 18:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 20:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 20:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 20:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 21:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-07 22:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-08 00:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> - 2016-12-08 09:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-08 10:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> - 2016-12-08 11:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-08 12:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> - 2016-12-08 15:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-08 16:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> - 2016-12-08 18:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2016-12-08 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: High-order per-cpu page allocator v7 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 17:10 +0100
csiph-web