Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1634142
| From | "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free |
| Date | 2017-05-02 07:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tCyHw-27S-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <tB98u-4Ii-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tBaed-5ps-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tBczn-6JZ-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tBehR-7VW-41@gated-at.bofh.it> <tCyet-1Ys-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi, Minchan,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:35:37PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> In fact, during the test, I found the overhead of sort() is comparable
>> with the performance difference of adding likely()/unlikely() to the
>> "if" in the function.
>
> Huang,
>
> This discussion is started from your optimization code:
>
> if (nr_swapfiles > 1)
> sort();
>
> I don't have such fast machine so cannot test it. However, you added
> such optimization code in there so I guess it's *worth* to review so
> with spending my time, I pointed out what you are missing and
> suggested a idea to find a compromise.
Sorry for wasting your time and Thanks a lot for your review and
suggestion!
When I started talking this with you, I found there is some measurable
overhead of sort(). But later when I done more tests, I found the
measurable overhead is at the same level of likely()/unlikely() compiler
notation. So you help me to find that, Thanks again!
> Now you are saying sort is so fast so no worth to add more logics
> to avoid the overhead?
> Then, please just drop that if condition part and instead, sort
> it unconditionally.
Now, because we found the overhead of sort() is low, I suggest to put
minimal effort to avoid it. Like the original implementation,
if (nr_swapfiles > 1)
sort();
Or, we can make nr_swapfiles more correct as Tim suggested (tracking
the number of the swap devices during swap on/off).
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 14:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-04-26 22:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-27 03:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-04-27 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-04-27 06:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-28 03:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-04-28 09:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-28 10:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-04-28 11:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-28 13:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-04-28 15:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-05-02 07:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-05-02 07:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-05-02 07:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH -mm -v3] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2017-05-02 08:10 +0200
csiph-web