Re: [PATCH v2] cpuidle-pseries: Fix CEDE latency conversion from tb to us

2020-09-03 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
s a warning in case we discover an extended-cede state with > wakeup latency to be 0. In such a case, ensure that CEDE(0) has a > non-zero wakeup latency. > > Fixes: commit d947fb4c965c ("cpuidle: pseries: Fixup exit latency for > CEDE(0)") > > Signed-off-by: Gautham

Re: [PATCH] Revert "powerpc/powernv/idle: Replace CPU feature check with PVR check"

2020-08-26 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
states are enabled and tested on the P10 platform > with this fix. > > This reverts commit 8747bf36f312356f8a295a0c39ff092d65ce75ae. > > Fixes: 8747bf36f312 ("powerpc/powernv/idle: Replace CPU feature check with > PVR check") > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Samp

Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpuidle-pseries: Block Extended CEDE(1) which adds no additional value.

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
nded CEDE(1) map to > the same hardware idle state. Since we already get SMT folding from > the normal CEDE, the Extended CEDE(1) doesn't provide any additional > value. This patch blocks Extended CEDE(1). > > Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan

Re: [PATCH 4/5] cpuidle-pseries : Include extended CEDE states in cpuidle framework

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
.0th: 13648 > 99.5th: 14768 > 99.9th: 15664 > min=0, max=29812 > > With Patch: > Latency percentiles (usec) > 50.0th: 30 > 75.0th: 40 > 90.0th: 51 > 95.0th: 59 > *99.0th: 13616 > 99.5th: 14512 > 99.9th: 15696 &

Re: [PATCH 3/5] cpuidle-pseries : Fixup exit latency for CEDE(0)

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
: 13104 > 99.5th: 14672 > 99.9th: 15824 > min=0, max=17993 > > With-patch: > Latency percentiles (usec) > 50.0th: 29 > 75.0th: 40 > 90.0th: 50 > 95.0th: 61 > *99.0th: 13648 > 99.5th: 14768 > 99.9th: 1

Re: [PATCH 2/5] cpuidle-pseries: Add function to parse extended CEDE records

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
= 10 > [5.913183] xcede : Record 0 : hint = 1, latency =0x400 tb-ticks, > Wake-on-irq = 1 > [5.913188] xcede : Record 1 : hint = 2, latency =0x3e8000 tb-ticks, > Wake-on-irq = 0 > [5.913193] cpuidle : Skipping the 2 Extended CEDE idle states > > Signed-off-by: Gaut

Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuidle-pseries: Set the latency-hint before entering CEDE

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
cede states through the > cpuidle framework, where each of them will have a different > cede-latency hint. > > Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > --- > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-pseries.c | 10 +- > 1 file changed, 9 insertion

Re: [PATCH 0/5] cpuidle-pseries: Parse extended CEDE information for idle.

2020-07-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Gautham R Shenoy [2020-07-07 16:41:34]: > From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" > > Hi, > > On pseries Dedicated Linux LPARs, apart from the polling snooze idle > state, we currently have the CEDE idle state which cedes the CPU to > the hypervisor with latency-hint = 0. > > However, the PowerVM hypervi

Re: [Skiboot] [PATCH v8 3/3] Self save API integration

2020-04-29 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
ing and usage. > > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > --- > doc/opal-api/opal-slw-self-save-reg-181.rst | 51 ++ > doc/opal-api/opal-slw-set-reg-100.rst | 5 + > doc/power-management.rs

Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] API to verify the STOP API and image compatibility

2020-04-29 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
SAD G. BRAHMASAMUDRA > Reviewed-by: Gregory S Still > Reviewed-by: Jennifer A Stofer > Reviewed-on: http://rchgit01.rchland.ibm.com/gerrit1/77614 > Tested-by: Jenkins OP Build CI > Tested-by: Jenkins OP HW > Reviewed-by: Daniel M Crowell > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh

Re: [Skiboot] [PATCH v8 1/3] Self Save: Introducing Support for SPR Self Save

2020-04-29 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
hristian R. Geddes > Signed-off-by: Prem Shanker Jha > Signed-off-by: Akshay Adiga > Signed-off-by: Pratik Rajesh Sampat Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > 2. The commit also incorporates changes that make STOP API project > agnostic changes include defining wrapper functions whi

Re: [PATCH] pseries/energy: Use OF accessor functions to read ibm,drc-indexes

2019-03-08 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
t; Fixes: commit e83636ac3334 ("pseries/drc-info: Search DRC properties for CPU > indexes") > Cc: #v4.16+ > Reported-by: Pavithra R. Prakash > Signed-off-by: Gautham R. Shenoy Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > --- > arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries_energy.

Re: [PATCH] cpuidle:powernv: Add the CPUIDLE_FLAG_POLLING for snooze

2018-07-03 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Gautham R Shenoy [2018-07-03 10:54:16]: > From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" > > In the situations where snooze is the only cpuidle state due to > firmware not exposing any platform idle states, the idle CPUs will > remain in snooze for a long time with interrupts disabled causing the > Hard-lockup de

Re: [PATCH V3] cpufreq: powernv: Fix the hardlockup by synchronus smp_call in timer interrupt

2018-04-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
if (gpstate_idx != gpstates->last_lpstate_idx) > queue_gpstate_timer(gpstates); > > + set_pstate(&freq_data); > spin_unlock(&gpstates->gpstate_lock); > - > - /* Timer may get migrated to a different cpu on cpu hot unplug */ > - smp_call_function_any(policy->cpus, set_pstate, &freq_data, 1); > } Fix looks good. Acked-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan

Re: [RESEND][PATCH] cpuidle/powernv : Restore different PSSCR for idle and hotplug

2018-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt [2018-03-01 08:40:22]: > On Thu, 2018-03-01 at 01:03 +0530, Akshay Adiga wrote: > > commit 1e1601b38e6e ("powerpc/powernv/idle: Restore SPRs for deep idle > > states via stop API.") uses stop-api provided by the firmware to restore > > PSSCR. PSSCR restore is required for

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc/powernv/cpuidle: Pass correct drv->cpumask for registration

2017-03-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Rafael J. Wysocki [2017-03-23 16:28:31]: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > wrote: > > drv->cpumask defaults to cpu_possible_mask in __cpuidle_driver_init(). > > On PowerNV platform cpu_present could be less than cpu_possible in cases > >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] cpuidle: Validate cpu_dev in cpuidle_add_sysfs

2017-03-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Rafael J. Wysocki [2017-03-23 16:27:31]: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > wrote: > > If a given cpu is not in cpu_present and cpu hotplug > > is disabled, arch can skip setting up the cpu_dev. > > > > Arch cpuidle driver should

[PATCH v2 2/2] cpuidle: Validate cpu_dev in cpuidle_add_sysfs

2017-03-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
] Registration of powernv driver failed. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan --- drivers/cpuidle/sysfs.c | 12 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/sysfs.c b/drivers/cpuidle/sysfs.c index c5adc8c..f2c3bce 100644 --- a/drivers/cpuidle/sysfs.c +++ b/drivers/cpuidle

[PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc/powernv/cpuidle: Pass correct drv->cpumask for registration

2017-03-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
e30] c000b564 ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x78 This patch fixes the bug by passing correct cpumask from powernv-cpuidle driver. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan --- drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-powernv.c | 18 ++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpui

[PATCH v1 0/2] cpuidle: Fixes in cpuidle driver

2017-03-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
ess incorrect address and crash. The following patch series fixes the cpuidle-powernv driver and also adds additional checks in cpuidle_add_sysfs() This patch set is against v4.11-rc3. Changed from v1: Updated commit message and comments. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan

Re: [PATCH 4.4 54/58] powerpc: Convert cmp to cmpd in idle enter sequence

2017-01-09 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
cmp, but cmpd is correct. Backport to stable so that new toolchains can > build old kernels. > > Fixes: 948cf67c4726 ("powerpc: Add NAP mode support on Power7 in HV mode") > Reviewed-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > Signed-off-by: Segher Boessenkool > Signed-off-by: M

Re: [patch 10/15] sched/migration: Move calc_load_migrate() into CPU_DYING

2016-07-12 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
al load > accounting mechanism. > > Fix it by adjusting for the currently running thread which calls > calc_load_migrate(). > > Fixes: e9cd8fa4fcfd: "sched/migration: Move calc_load_migrate() into > CPU_DYING" > Reported-by: Anton Blanchard Tested-by: Vaidyanatha

Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: powernv/pseries: Decrease the snooze residency

2015-06-03 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt [2015-05-30 20:38:22]: > On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 11:31 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > In shared lpar case, spinning in guest context may potentially take > > away cycles from other lpars waiting to run on the same physical cpu. > > > &

Re: [PATCH] cpuidle: powernv/pseries: Decrease the snooze residency

2015-05-29 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Preeti U Murthy [2015-05-29 19:17:17]: [snip] > > + if (max_idle_state > 1) { > > + snooze_timeout_en = true; > > + snooze_timeout = cpuidle_state_table[1].target_residency * > > +tb_ticks_per_usec; > > + } > > Any idea why we don't have sno

[tip:sched/core] sched: Fix asymmetric scheduling for POWER7

2013-11-06 Thread tip-bot for Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Commit-ID: 2042abe7977222ef606306faa2dce8fd51e98e65 Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/2042abe7977222ef606306faa2dce8fd51e98e65 Author: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan AuthorDate: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 08:42:42 +0530 Committer: Ingo Molnar CommitDate: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 12:37:54 +0100 sched: Fix

[PATCH 3/3] sched: Aggressive balance in domains whose groups share package resources

2013-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
ame group. Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 18 ++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c index 828ed97..bbcd96b 100644 --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c +++ b/kernel/sched/fai

[PATCH 2/3] sched: Fix asymmetric scheduling for POWER7

2013-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
his domain has no idle cpu. Hence, nr_busy check against group weight can be removed. Reported-by: Michael Neuling Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy --- kernel/sched/fair.c |4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sc

[PATCH 1/3] sched: Fix nohz_kick_needed to consider the nr_busy of the parent domain's group

2013-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
CE comes before the check for ASYM_PACKING. Priority is given to avoid more than one busy thread in a core as much as possible before attempting asymmetric packing. Signed-off-by: Preeti U Murthy Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan --- kernel/sched/fair.c | 19 +-- 1 f

[PATCH 0/3] sched: Fixes for task placement in SMT threads

2013-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
. This series applies on v3.12-rc6 and tested on x86 and powerpc. --Vaidy --- Preeti U Murthy (2): sched: Fix nohz_kick_needed to consider the nr_busy of the parent domain's group sched: Aggressive balance in domains whose groups share package resources Vaidyanathan Srinivas

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] cpuidle/ppc: CPU goes tickless if there are no arch-specific constraints

2013-07-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Preeti U Murthy [2013-07-27 13:20:37]: > Hi Ben, > > On 07/27/2013 12:00 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 08:09 +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > >> *The lapic of a broadcast CPU is active always*. Say CPUX, wants the > >> broadcast CPU to wake it up at timeX. Since w

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] cpuidle/ppc: CPU goes tickless if there are no arch-specific constraints

2013-07-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt [2013-07-27 16:30:05]: > On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 08:09 +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > > *The lapic of a broadcast CPU is active always*. Say CPUX, wants the > > broadcast CPU to wake it up at timeX. Since we cannot program the lapic > > of a remote CPU, CPUX will need to

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8][Sorted-buddy] mm: Linux VM Infrastructure to support Memory Power Management

2012-11-08 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Mel Gorman [2012-11-08 18:02:57]: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:22:13AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > > Hi Mel, Thanks for detailed review and comments. The goal of this patch series is to brainstorm on ideas that enable Linux VM

Re: [PATCH 33/36] autonuma: powerpc port

2012-08-22 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Benjamin Herrenschmidt [2012-08-23 08:56:34]: > On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 08:01 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 16:59 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan > > > > > > * PMD flaging is not r

Re: Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings

2008-01-09 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-09 12:35:07]: > > * Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How do we take this technique to the next step where we can > > consolidate short running jobs as well? Did you face any difficulty >

Re: Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings

2008-01-09 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Siddha, Suresh B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-08 13:24:00]: > On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 11:08:15PM +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The following experiments were conducted on a two socket dual core > > intel processor based machine in

Analysis of sched_mc_power_savings

2008-01-08 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=y CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BUILD=y CONFIG_HPET_TIMER=y CONFIG_HPET_EMULATE_RTC=y tick-sched.c has been instrumented to collect idle entry and exit time stamps. Instrumentation patch: Instrument tick-sched nohz code and generate time stamp trace data. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan

Re: 1.0.0.0 DNS replies for many domain names (network)

2007-12-16 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
* Amogh Hooshdar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-14 17:20:17]: > I am having a strange problem with Debian Etch 4.0 (both 64-bit and > 32-bit) using 2.6.18 kernel. Most websites do not open with browser, > Pidgin and most other GUI applicatoins. but I am able to ping them > fine. I am also able to do

Re: 2.6.24-rc1 on PPC64: machine check exception

2007-11-15 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
> >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=14475 > > Thanks for pointing me to this patch. I will try out and let you know if > this fixed the problem. Hi Anton, This patch fixed the problem. I am able to run and profile ebizzy on 128-way PPC64. However this fix is not included in 2.

Re: 2.6.24-rc1 on PPC64: machine check exception

2007-11-05 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Anton Blanchard wrote: > Hi > >> I got the following exception on a 128-way PPC64 machine while running >> ebizzy-0.2 benchmark. > > Is it a 64bit application? Im guessing its fixed by this: Hi Anton, The ebizzy application I tried is 64-bit. > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=144

2.6.24-rc1 on PPC64: machine check exception

2007-11-05 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Hi, I got the following exception on a 128-way PPC64 machine while running ebizzy-0.2 benchmark. cpu 0x48: Vector: 200 (Machine Check) at [c06df1bb37c0] pc: c007a26c: .exit_robust_list+0x78/0x228 lr: c007a240: .exit_robust_list+0x4c/0x228 sp: c06df1bb3a40 ms

Re: Question about free/used memory on Linux

2007-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Ravinandan Arakali (rarakali) wrote: > Hi Vaidy, > Thanks for clarifying several of my doubts. > > To answer your question about my intention, we currently have a > system with 2 GB RAM and I need to find out the actual used and > free memory so that we can decide if the same setup(applications

Re: Question about free/used memory on Linux

2007-10-21 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Ravinandan Arakali (rarakali) wrote: > Hi kernel gurus, > I am trying to find out the memory that's used on my linux box. > I find that there are quite a few confusing metrics. How do > I find out the "true" used memory ? pagecache pages may be the reason for the confusion. Most free memory can b

Re: [-mm PATCH 0/9] Memory controller introduction (v4)

2007-08-09 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 12:51:39 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 01:39:37 +0530 >> Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> At OLS, the resource management BOF, it was discussed that we need to manage >>> RSS and unmapped page

Re: [-mm PATCH 6/9] Memory controller add per container LRU and reclaim (v4)

2007-08-07 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >>> +unsigned long mem_container_isolate_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan, >>> + struct list_head *dst, >>> +

Re: [-mm PATCH 6/9] Memory controller add per container LRU and reclaim (v4)

2007-07-31 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >> +unsigned long mem_container_isolate_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan, >> +struct list_head *dst, >> +unsigned long *scanned, int order, >> +int mode, struct zone *

Re: [-mm PATCH 4/9] Memory controller memory accounting (v4)

2007-07-31 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: >> +lock_meta_page(page); >> +/* >> + * Check if somebody else beat us to allocating the meta_page >> + */ >> +race_mp = page_get_meta_page(page); >> +if (race_mp) { >> +kfree(mp); >> +mp = race_mp; >> +atomic_inc

Re: [-mm PATCH 4/7] Memory controller memory accounting

2007-07-05 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Balbir Singh wrote: > Add the accounting hooks. The accounting is carried out for RSS and Page > Cache (unmapped) pages. There is now a common limit and accounting for both. > The RSS accounting is accounted at page_add_*_rmap() and page_remove_rmap() > time. Page cache is accounted at add_to_pag

Re: IRQ handling difference between i386 and x86_64

2007-07-02 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sat, 2007-06-30 at 16:55 +0200, Krzysztof Oledzki wrote: >> Hello, >> >> It seems that IRQ handling is somehow different between i386 and x86_64. >> >> In my Dell PowerEdge 1950 is it possible to enable interrupts spreading >> over all CPUs. This a single CPU, four CO

[RFC][PATCH 3/3] Pagecache reclaim

2007-06-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Pagecache controller reclaim changes Reclaim path needs performance improvement. For now it is minor changes to include unmapped pages in our list of page_container. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mm/rss_container.c

[RFC][PATCH 2/3] Pagecache and RSS accounting hooks

2007-06-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/exec.c |4 ++-- mm/filemap.c| 17 + mm/memory.c | 18 +- mm/migrate.c|4 ++-- mm/rmap.c | 12 ++-- mm/swap_state.c | 16 mm/swap

[RFC][PATCH 1/3] Pagecache accounting

2007-06-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
page_container list only once independent of repeated calls from pagecache, swapcache and mmap to RSS. No setup patch is required since rss_limit and rss_usage has been generalised as the resource counter for pagecache as well. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include

[RFC][PATCH 0/3] Containers: Integrated RSS and pagecache control v5

2007-06-28 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Containers: Integrated RSS and pagecache accounting and control v5 -- Based on the discussions at OLS yesterday, the consensus was to try an integrated pagecache controller along with RSS controller under the same usage limit. This p

Re: [RFC] mm-controller

2007-06-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Paul Menage wrote: > On 6/25/07, Paul Menage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 6/22/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Merging both limits will eliminate the issue, however we would need >>> individual limits for pagecache and RSS

Re: [RFC] mm-controller

2007-06-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 22:05 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > >> Merging both limits will eliminate the issue, however we would need >> individual limits for pagecache and RSS for better control. There are >> use cases for pagecache_limit

Re: [RFC] mm-controller

2007-06-22 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 16:33 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: >> Peter Zijlstra wrote: [snip] > Not quite sure on 2, from reading the pagecache controller, I got the > impression that enforcing both limits got you into trouble. Merging the > limits would rid us of that issue, no

[RFC][PATCH 3/4] Pagecache and RSS accounting hooks

2007-06-20 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/exec.c |4 ++-- mm/filemap.c| 18 ++ mm/memory.c | 18 +- mm/migrate.c|4 ++-- mm/rmap.c | 12 ++-- mm/swap_state.c | 16 mm/swap

[RFC][PATCH 4/4] Pagecache reclaim

2007-06-20 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Pagecache controller reclaim changes Reclaim path needs performance improvement. For now it is minor changes to include unmapped pages in our list of page_container. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mm/rss_container.c

[RFC][PATCH 2/4] Pagecache accounting

2007-06-20 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
added or removed from page_container list only once independent of repeated calls from pagecache, swapcache and mmap to RSS. Flags in page_container is used to keep the accounting correct between RSS and unmapped pagecache (includes swapcache) pages. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EM

[RFC][PATCH 1/4] Pagecache controller setup

2007-06-20 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
ache usage is all file backed pages used by the container which includes swapcache as well. Separate res_counter for pagecache has been added. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mm/rss_container.c | 43 +++ 1 file change

[RFC][PATCH 0/4] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v4)

2007-06-20 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v4) --- This patch extends the RSS controller to account and reclaim pagecache and swapcache pages. This is a prototype to demonstrate that the existing container infrastructure is usef

Re: [PATCH 0/8] RSS controller based on process containers (v3.1)

2007-06-08 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Herbert Poetzl wrote: > On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 04:39:28PM +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote: >> Herbert Poetzl wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 05:25:25PM +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote: [snip] When this usage exceeds the limit set some pages are reclaimed from the owning container. In case

Re: [PATCH 8/8] Per-container pages reclamation

2007-05-31 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2007 19:42:26 +0400 > Pavel Emelianov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_RSS_CONTAINER >> +unsigned long try_to_free_pages_in_container(struct rss_container *cnt) >> +{ >> +struct scan_control sc = { >> +.gfp_mask = GFP_

[RFC][PATCH 2/3] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v3)

2007-05-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
added or removed from page_container list only once independent of repeated calls from pagecache, swapcache and mmap to RSS. Flags in page_container is used to keep the accounting correct between RSS and unmapped pagecache (includes swapcache) pages. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EM

[RFC][PATCH 3/3] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v3)

2007-05-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/exec.c |4 ++-- mm/filemap.c| 18 ++ mm/fremap.c |4 ++-- mm/memory.c | 20 ++-- mm/migrate.c|4 ++-- mm/rmap.c | 12 ++-- mm/swap_state.c

[RFC][PATCH 1/3] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v3)

2007-05-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
ache usage is all file backed pages used by the container which includes swapcache as well. Separate res_counter for pagecache has been added. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mm/rss_container.c | 42 ++ 1 file change

[RFC][PATCH 0/3] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v3)

2007-05-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v3) --- This patch extends the RSS controller to account and reclaim pagecache and swapcache pages. This is a prototype to demonstrate that the existing container infrastructure is usef

Re: [PATCH 0/7] Containers (V8): Generic Process Containers

2007-04-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Hi Paul, In [patch 3/7] Containers (V8): Add generic multi-subsystem API to containers, you have forcefully enabled interrupt in container_init_subsys() with spin_unlock_irq() which breaks on PPC64. > +static void container_init_subsys(struct container_subsys *ss) { > + int retval; > + s

Re: [PATCH 2/7] Containers (V8): Cpusets hooked into containers

2007-04-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This patch removes the process grouping code from the cpusets code, > instead hooking it into the generic container system. This temporarily > adds cpuset-specific code in kernel/container.c, which is removed by > the next patch in the series. > > Signed-off-by: Paul M

Re: [PATCH 0/8] RSS controller based on process containers (v2)

2007-04-18 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Pavel Emelianov wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> *ugh* /me no like. >> >> The basic premises seems to be that we can track page owners perfectly >> (although this patch set does not yet do so), through get/release > > It looks like you have examined the patches not very carefully > before concl

Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-27 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 3/27/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Aubrey Li wrote: >>> On 3/27/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Correct, shrink_page_list() is called from shrink_inact

Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-27 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 3/27/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Correct, shrink_page_list() is called from shrink_inactive_list() but >> the above code is patched in shrink_active_list(). The >> 'force_reclaim_mapped' label is from fun

Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-26 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 3/6/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The reclaim code is similar to RSS memory controller. Scan control is >> slightly different since we are targeting different type of pages. >> >> Additionally no mapped pa

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code

2007-03-14 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Nick Piggin wrote: > Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > >> Accounting becomes easy if we have a container pointer in struct page. >> This can form base ground for building controllers since any memory >> related controller would be interested in tracking pages. How

Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/7] RSS accounting hooks over the code

2007-03-14 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Balbir Singh wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: >> Balbir Singh wrote: >>> Nick Piggin wrote: And strangely, this example does not go outside the parameters of what you asked for AFAIKS. In the worst case of one container getting _all_ the shared pages, they will still remain inside their

Re: userspace pagecache management tool

2007-03-08 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 00:01:55 +0100 bert hubert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 02:26:09PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > It is *not* a global instruction. It uses setenv, so the user's policy > affects only the target process and its forked c

Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-07 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Shane wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 16:43 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: >> Please let me know if so see any problem running the patch. The >> patches are against 2.6.20 only since dependent patches are at that level. > > My problem - a bad copy of the patch. It p

Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Kari Hurtta wrote: > Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > in gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.mm: > >> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/mm/pagecache_acct.c >> +++ linux-2.6.20/mm/pagecache_acct.c >> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ >> #include &

Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Shane wrote: > Anyone else have trouble fitting this patch ???. > I see a later version today, but not markedly different from this > mornings (Aus time). Initially I thought I had the first version, prior > to Balbir's RSS controller V2 re-write, but apparently not. > Kernel 2.6.20.1 Hi Shane,

[PATCH 1/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller setup

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
kernel options and have been added along with Makefile changes. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include/linux/pagecache_acct.h | 53 + init/Kconfig |7 mm/Makefile|1 mm/pagecache_acct.c

[PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
hence pagecache controller patches are dependent on RSS memory controller patch even though the features are independently configurable at compile time. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include/linux/memcontrol.h |6 +++ mm/memcontrol.c|4

Re: [PATCH 2/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller accounting

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
obtained from struct page which holds the container pointer. This framework avoids any additional pointers in struct page. additions and deletions from pagecache are hooked to charge and uncharge the corresponding container. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include

[PATCH 0/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v1)

2007-03-06 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Containers: Pagecache accounting and control subsystem (v1) --- This patch adds pagecache accounting and control on top of Paul's container subsystem v7 posted at http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/12/88 and Balbir's RSS controller posted at http:

Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH][2/4] Add RSS accounting and control

2007-02-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Balbir Singh wrote: > Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: >> Balbir Singh wrote: >>> Paul Menage wrote: >>>> On 2/19/07, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> More worrisome is the potential for use-after-free. What prevents the >>

Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH][2/4] Add RSS accounting and control

2007-02-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Balbir Singh wrote: > Paul Menage wrote: >> On 2/19/07, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: More worrisome is the potential for use-after-free. What prevents the pointer at mm->container from referring to freed memory after we're dropped the lock? >>> The container cannot

Re: [PATCH] drop page cache of a single file

2007-01-27 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > Currently, by /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches, applications could drop pagecache, > slab(dentries and inodes), or both, but applications couldn't choose to > just drop the page cache of one file. An user of VOD (Video-On-Demand) > needs this capability to have more detailed contro

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Al Boldi wrote: > Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: >> Al Boldi wrote: >>> Rik van Riel wrote: >>>> Christoph Lameter wrote: >>>>> This is a patch using some of Aubrey's work plugging it in what is >>>>> IMHO the right way. Feel fre

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> Apart from kswapd, limiting pagecache helps performance of >> applications by not eating away their ANON pages or other parts of its >> resident data set. When there is enough free memory, then there is no >> performance issue. However memory is always utilized to the m

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Al Boldi wrote: > Rik van Riel wrote: >> Christoph Lameter wrote: >>> This is a patch using some of Aubrey's work plugging it in what is IMHO >>> the right way. Feel free to improve on it. I have gotten repeatedly >>> requests to be able to limit the pagecache. >> IMHO it's a bad hack. >> >> It w

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-25 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Erik Andersen wrote: > >> It would be far more useful if an application could hint to the >> pagecache as to which files are and which files as not worth >> caching, especially when the application knows a priori that data >> from a particular file

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-24 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 1/25/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Christoph Lameter wrote: >>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: >>> >>>> With your patch, MMAP of a file that will cross the pagecache limit

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-24 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Rik van Riel wrote: > Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > >> In my opinion, once a >> file page is mapped by the process, then it should be treated at par >> with anon pages. Application programs generally do not mmap a file >> page if the reuse for the content is v

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-24 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > >> With your patch, MMAP of a file that will cross the pagecache limit hangs the >> system. As I mentioned in my previous mail, without subtracting the >> NR_FILE_MAPPED, the reclaim will

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-24 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
y and fail. I have tested your patch with the attached fix on my PPC64 box. Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- mm/page_alloc.c |3 ++- mm/vmscan.c |3 ++- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- linux-2.6.20-rc5.orig/mm/page_alloc.c

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

2007-01-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Christoph Lameter wrote: > This is a patch using some of Aubrey's work plugging it in what is IMHO > the right way. Feel free to improve on it. I have gotten repeatedly > requests to be able to limit the pagecache. With the revised VM statistics > this is now actually possile. I'd like to know mo

Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

2007-01-23 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 1/19/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Aubrey, >> >> I used your patch on my PPC64 box and I do not get expected >> behavior. As you had requested, I am attaching zoneinfo and meminfo >> dumps: >>

Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

2007-01-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > On 1/19/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi Aubrey, >> >> The idea of creating separate flag for pagecache in page_alloc is >> interesting. The good part is that you flag watermark low and the >&g

Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

2007-01-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > Here is the newest patch against 2.6.20-rc5. > == > From ad9ca9a32bdcaddce9988afbf0187bfd04685a0c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Aubrey.Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:08:31 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] Add an

Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

2007-01-19 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Aubrey Li wrote: > Here is the newest patch against 2.6.20-rc5. > == > From ad9ca9a32bdcaddce9988afbf0187bfd04685a0c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Aubrey.Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:08:31 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] Add an

Re: [PATCH] Provide an interface to limit total page cache.

2007-01-17 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
=1M count=1024 cat /proc/meminfo The "Cached: xxx" count should hit the set limit and not consume all available memory. Any feedback is appreciated. Signed-off-by: Roy Huang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Signed-off-by: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- inclu

Re: prioritize PCI traffic ?

2007-01-15 Thread Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 19:23 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: >> Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: >>> Dear all, >>> >>> is it possible to explicitly tell the kernel to prioritize PCI traffic >>> for a number of cards in pci sl

  1   2   >