From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Pankaj Suryawanshi <pankaj.suryawanshi@einfochips.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: mm/cma.c: High latency for cma allocation
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 10:53:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190321095337.GM8696@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SG2PR02MB30981381635A6BC3783D42CDE8400@SG2PR02MB3098.apcprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Can you please fix your email client? The broken quoting is just
irritating.
On Tue 19-03-19 11:45:03, Pankaj Suryawanshi wrote:
[...]
> I have tried for latency count for 385MB:
>
> reclaim- reclaim_clean_pages_from_list()
> migrate- migrate_pages()
> migrateranges- isolate_migratepages_range()
> overall - __alloc_contig_migrate_range()
>
> Note: output is in us
>
> [ 1151.420923] LATENCY reclaim= 43 migrate=128 migrateranges=23
> [ 1151.421209] LATENCY reclaim= 11 migrate=253 migrateranges=14
> [ 1151.427856] LATENCY reclaim= 45 migrate=12 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.434485] LATENCY reclaim= 44 migrate=33 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.440975] LATENCY reclaim= 45 migrate=0 migrateranges=11
> [ 1151.447513] LATENCY reclaim= 39 migrate=35 migrateranges=11
> [ 1151.453919] LATENCY reclaim= 46 migrate=0 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.460474] LATENCY reclaim= 39 migrate=41 migrateranges=11
> [ 1151.466947] LATENCY reclaim= 54 migrate=32 migrateranges=17
> [ 1151.473464] LATENCY reclaim= 45 migrate=21 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.480016] LATENCY reclaim= 41 migrate=39 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.486551] LATENCY reclaim= 41 migrate=36 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.493199] LATENCY reclaim= 13 migrate=188 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.500034] LATENCY reclaim= 60 migrate=94 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.506686] LATENCY reclaim= 78 migrate=9 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.513313] LATENCY reclaim= 33 migrate=147 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.519839] LATENCY reclaim= 52 migrate=98 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.526556] LATENCY reclaim= 46 migrate=126 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.533254] LATENCY reclaim= 22 migrate=230 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.540145] LATENCY reclaim= 0 migrate=305 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.546997] LATENCY reclaim= 1 migrate=301 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.553686] LATENCY reclaim= 40 migrate=201 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.560395] LATENCY reclaim= 35 migrate=149 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.567076] LATENCY reclaim= 77 migrate=43 migrateranges=16
> [ 1151.573836] LATENCY reclaim= 34 migrate=190 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.580510] LATENCY reclaim= 51 migrate=120 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.587240] LATENCY reclaim= 33 migrate=147 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.594036] LATENCY reclaim= 20 migrate=241 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.600749] LATENCY reclaim= 75 migrate=41 migrateranges=13
> [ 1151.607402] LATENCY reclaim= 77 migrate=32 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.613956] LATENCY reclaim= 72 migrate=35 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.620642] LATENCY reclaim= 59 migrate=162 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.627181] LATENCY reclaim= 76 migrate=9 migrateranges=11
> [ 1151.633795] LATENCY reclaim= 80 migrate=0 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.640278] LATENCY reclaim= 87 migrate=18 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.646758] LATENCY reclaim= 82 migrate=10 migrateranges=11
> [ 1151.653307] LATENCY reclaim= 71 migrate=31 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.659911] LATENCY reclaim= 61 migrate=77 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.666514] LATENCY reclaim= 94 migrate=42 migrateranges=15
> [ 1151.673089] LATENCY reclaim= 67 migrate=59 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.679655] LATENCY reclaim= 81 migrate=14 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.686253] LATENCY reclaim= 49 migrate=93 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.692815] LATENCY reclaim= 61 migrate=54 migrateranges=12
> [ 1151.699438] LATENCY reclaim= 42 migrate=99 migrateranges=10
> [ 1151.705881] OVERALL overall=285157
cumulative numbers are
reclaim:2222 migrate:3995 migrateranges:552 sum:6217
So those code paths you were measuring were contributing to the overal
latency only marginally (~2%).
> cma_alloc latency is = 297385 us
As I've said earlier I would just use perf with the call graph support
and look at the time distribution to see where the bottleneck is.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-21 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-18 12:58 Pankaj Suryawanshi
2019-03-18 13:07 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-18 13:30 ` [External] " Pankaj Suryawanshi
[not found] ` <SG2PR02MB309886996889791555D5B53EE8470@SG2PR02MB3098.apcprd02.prod.outlook.com>
2019-03-18 13:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-18 14:02 ` Pankaj Suryawanshi
2019-03-18 14:29 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-19 10:29 ` Pankaj Suryawanshi
2019-03-19 11:45 ` Pankaj Suryawanshi
2019-03-21 9:53 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190321095337.GM8696@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=pankaj.suryawanshi@einfochips.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®