MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1638619795-71451-1-git-send-email-wang.yong12@zte.com.cn>
 <Yax01zjuzmNyyJK/@balbir-desktop> <CAOH5QeDhjyjAkS1bUju2cv67KFukUr0ov8uG+z3bM6Oa=iFrMA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Ya7uQingLC3fMJlt@balbir-desktop> <CAOH5QeC+0xDrgO+t3zwN4o48F9Q2CiTnzQDO78kuJLfyNJwoLA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOH5QeC+0xDrgO+t3zwN4o48F9Q2CiTnzQDO78kuJLfyNJwoLA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   yong w <yongw.pur@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 21:56:08 +0800
Message-ID: <CAOH5QeCO_EZzkU=B3L1=1OPiZa7XxnWZK87GbwXNOQXxZqYcoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 linux-next] delayacct: track delays from memory compact
To:     Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>, mingo@kernel.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        yang.yang29@zte.com.cn, wang.yong12@zte.com.cn
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hello,  is this patch OK?

Thanks.

yong w <yongw.pur@gmail.com> =E4=BA=8E2021=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=888=E6=97=A5=E5=
=91=A8=E4=B8=89 00:50=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> =E4=BA=8E2021=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=887=
=E6=97=A5=E5=91=A8=E4=BA=8C 13:16=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 07:08:02PM +0800, yong w wrote:
> > > Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com> =E4=BA=8E2021=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=
=885=E6=97=A5=E5=91=A8=E6=97=A5 16:17=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 04:09:55AM -0800, yongw.pur@gmail.com wrote=
:
> > > > > From: wangyong <wang.yong12@zte.com.cn>
> > > > >
> > > > > Delay accounting does not track the delay of memory compact.
> > > > > When there is not enough free memory, tasks can spend
> > > > > a amount of their time waiting for compact.
> > > > >
> > > > > To get the impact of tasks in direct memory compact, measure
> > > > > the delay when allocating memory through memory compact.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Should we call this DIRECT_COMPACT and through documentation
> > > > or name change imply that this won't work for kcompactd the
> > > > kernel thread - based on my reading of the patches.
> > > >
> > > Using DIRECT_COMPACT is a little redundant=EF=BC=8Cbecause the
> > > delayacct stats of delay accounting is specific to tasks, it has
> > > nothing to do with kcompactd, which is similar to the RECLAIM field.
> > >
> >
> > What would we expect when we call delayacct -p <pidof kcompactd>
> > to be output?
> If the slow path of memory allocation is invoked in the kcompacd process,
> there may be delays being recorded.
>
> > Don't feel to strongly, but it can be confusing that kcompactd
> > has spent no time in compact'ing? Not that delayacct is used for
> > kernel threads, but I am not sure if that use case exists today.
> Yes, delayacct does not restrict the process of obtaining information=EF=
=BC=8C
> but kcompactd is used for  compaction,  the compact delay of
> kcompatd is not actually a delay.Maybe it can be added to the
> document later to make it clearer.
>
> Thanks for your reply!