Received: by 2002:a05:6358:5282:b0:b5:90e7:25cb with SMTP id g2csp2491845rwa; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:32:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR4NkcR38+Icc3XlPIom5q3yqP9d4DEfC2c8fZ24Oo4EtQ3kIUItEyk5z81Axqz94HY6wQF3 X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:60c7:b0:731:17e4:7fcc with SMTP id hv7-20020a17090760c700b0073117e47fccmr13188368ejc.73.1661182340770; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:32:20 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1661182340; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CLxt76Mrufk6NG7ABaTlTDKuSmtNJgxHafnfcRaoT0fAErjb/hSsldihkQi5MPSwGz 0ra38Go4YiMfd4MRYHE5QQ19F55j1zDv4Xtaxssuj2VaN+0D6JzlJvBaFzgxKhws677t Ppgxiz77Lw/TSst7uueBY7gQpefeYIvKAJkKsRXj8RlCFo+BndrohFvmsqLWvhzwbxAa swjSyrv/ma75Tn2xQRMAJkmHnKkkQG9uizqdz8R3I+ITal5naP9LJTb47NMkSgv1+mq2 j/h9XJnvd/2itsGaaZ6kWRPP3lpqRGdk7bQ/1Qc/q/KZ3LbHzixUzyuFQUiRr8DJpdV/ nDZQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=DL+gliCYJUBpfOq1j0gfe9XybjmiohhXfC5HxYReYKQ=; b=RP/XNVCwafwwTXwiS08WPy8cPmXvVH1dCO9/Vsu+QzJ/mO3e3HEXqkdnEaR6qUIvJW 1qs6m12/c0WqvSRhSK+vKJ1CKLMEXFOXGAa0kPPNzDjBkNfa4mQKAyGM9fYJCG7y1J4x ccqbOIG8YP0s+5cQowszCx3M293kvmZBItl9rmeUuTYgMXd28/ZGkR25oxjB9b2Hfy4f 7kUwZFj+JEirmJpLwrYOJKE5TOgxrAAESrY8fKucexR4uN7VaRyOJ96EgYR1sBuTqffO 6QY2RMRMUk1I6KBqFJug8nJBhPC9635lHeOHZHxcBAUIc9sVtcW9gnkZN0JBtqNelgFC e79w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Wy9VrLR+; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id wz8-20020a170906fe4800b0073d678f50c1si5982689ejb.416.2022.08.22.08.31.37; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:32:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Wy9VrLR+; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236503AbiHVPOY (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:14:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37888 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236444AbiHVPNv (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:13:51 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0032E3FA2A for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:09:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id ds12-20020a17090b08cc00b001fae6343d9fso6008553pjb.0 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:09:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=DL+gliCYJUBpfOq1j0gfe9XybjmiohhXfC5HxYReYKQ=; b=Wy9VrLR+iXIOs02vfJHYtL6p0NbydFm1yZdXSv/BbjuFOkMtSTPP5CovxJ8349YqKj G3MVhdA4OpFY8unEsaSt6zl96K01EATVtDmzrpuZf7ttwrRaJShdhZDkiI3ve+qZNaMO LaMlsEqTM0HnQfbQJ+Ybp1cnhMyLAgbc8INMpkq7KkujbvLbZ3V3a+NkCsxtQtac3dFk vdsSPaw69M8DRRGlUlj8oR/cctPuyyB4P3GQXi7AhcJrZf2VSCnqZnoHSJmlaPfCsIHj Joq2WkpjnyjHGnaNIuUdQt4Q0lg3lljWYfXsxd0kZCxPo/shZ5oEicOIck6uwGYGrqs4 U2ZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=DL+gliCYJUBpfOq1j0gfe9XybjmiohhXfC5HxYReYKQ=; b=fbMHnqj4AEDr8zmTU8PcwTc51RURseUR2qahq48/lE/0EUmZlcjs9UZ0k7G+/xrlvx FxdRwsdkXVfSZQECShQi6hGFhc9D+jtHpa137wWeESdy8sjccmLf+ruCl9x44W45zggQ rNjni/SsydSrwS80i4zLUMSBrh/rbekxzZz/zdBIHW3ue2sNbLbDL7VmuJqwiVyWeKtn ZoQdS0mVxQbOTLvFi0S4m4wDHvYwaoKdAHGG4twQaPLCddysBvWQXsi8Ja/fBRGSiKK+ qs2XMgnl+CkIRlUhIunPrT6M+rijc7yGLFjI1MboTnjRJh17DG/Wf5GYod6tmEOKwxa1 Ov5w== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0CleWoirvkA/nnMEDYWhI684Qe+DvLas1X/o/9ZKd/mDTmKd62 B9bTMmzEZAL3uqIBppJsdqB7rky5FGlkkPF28ZfS5A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3881:b0:1f5:81e:8ceb with SMTP id mu1-20020a17090b388100b001f5081e8cebmr28140119pjb.207.1661180952809; Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:09:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220822001737.4120417-1-shakeelb@google.com> <20220822001737.4120417-4-shakeelb@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Shakeel Butt Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 08:09:01 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] memcg: increase MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH to 64 To: Michal Hocko Cc: Johannes Weiner , Roman Gushchin , Muchun Song , =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= , Eric Dumazet , Soheil Hassas Yeganeh , Feng Tang , Oliver Sang , Andrew Morton , lkp@lists.01.org, Cgroups , Linux MM , netdev , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 3:47 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > > To evaluate the impact of this optimization, on a 72 CPUs machine, we > > ran the following workload in a three level of cgroup hierarchy with top > > level having min and low setup appropriately. More specifically > > memory.min equal to size of netperf binary and memory.low double of > > that. > > a similar feedback to the test case description as with other patches. What more info should I add to the description? Why did I set up min and low or something else? > > > > $ netserver -6 > > # 36 instances of netperf with following params > > $ netperf -6 -H ::1 -l 60 -t TCP_SENDFILE -- -m 10K > > > > Results (average throughput of netperf): > > Without (6.0-rc1) 10482.7 Mbps > > With patch 17064.7 Mbps (62.7% improvement) > > > > With the patch, the throughput improved by 62.7%. > > > > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt > > Reported-by: kernel test robot > > Anyway > Acked-by: Michal Hocko Thanks