From nobody Thu May 9 09:34:51 2024 X-Original-To: current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VZn204yHwz5JF16 for ; Thu, 09 May 2024 09:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from mailgate.Leidinger.net (bastille.leidinger.net [89.238.82.207]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature ECDSA (P-256) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mailgate.leidinger.net", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4VZn2017ntz4hpL; Thu, 9 May 2024 09:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1715247339; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hV+Y6qfham2XKHEDdNQBo5TyH41M4JkWEhygxGmDbNw=; b=RzJaM9RzrpiN/iIrgcuh18F4vC6sAh9pwpw0qAKgXw9b/yQM23+AqIFG+DKmRrzcKGnDGp SniYBBVGWqSYb/LeAE4tfTgiMwgUJ7SZR8MRQo28Nd7vNHI2gHv52Dv81w7M79duKyiiQW NtISUlv9YoTth/+QhIctZrISiLkoSDQ+ghrIBV+BohpdaCk5PwGqYfIo2l98xf/gPDg/hT 0Ligm5nAz5Dwggif0w00gHyPvRUFnmPLEWxSmITRob2FmXsF1AzOycuCDtT21IxW8QPlw4 dNmgy+gRgUOFKdi16e/aEk0hqrU9s0OAhafUguX2xNkoPu0jvE8CevdQk8O2xQ== Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 11:34:51 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bojan_Novkovi=C4=87?= Cc: Current , alc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Graph of the FreeBSD memory fragmentation In-Reply-To: <5c7357c3-5a10-4a8e-9245-8a5787c57f35@freebsd.org> References: <0a3ddc685e54a289ff5cff569a95cd29@Leidinger.net> <5c7357c3-5a10-4a8e-9245-8a5787c57f35@freebsd.org> Message-ID: Organization: No organization, this is a private message. Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=_4c82248a7cf604e4aac14a20a26be955"; micalg=pgp-sha256 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:34240, ipnet:89.238.64.0/18, country:DE] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4VZn2017ntz4hpL This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --=_4c82248a7cf604e4aac14a20a26be955 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Am 2024-05-08 18:45, schrieb Bojan Novković: > Hi, > > On 5/7/24 14:02, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I created some graphs of the memory fragmentation. >> https://www.leidinger.net/blog/2024/05/07/plotting-the-freebsd-memory-fragmentation/ >> >> My goal was not comparing a specific change on a given benchmark, but >> to "have something which visualizes memory fragmentation". As part of >> that, Bojans commit >> https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=7a79d066976149349ecb90240d02eed0c4268737 >> was just in the middle of my data collection. I have the impression >> that it made a positive difference in my non deterministic workload. > Thank you for working on this, the plots look great! > They provide a really clean visual overview of what's happening. > I'm working on another type of memory visualization which might > interest you, I'll share it with you once its done. > One small nit - the fragmentation index does not quantify fragmentation > for UMA buckets, but for page allocator freelists. Do I get it more correctly now: UMA buckets are type/structure specific allocation lists, and the page allocator freelists are size-specific allocation lists (which are used by UMA when no free item is available in a bucket)? >> Is there anything which prevents https://reviews.freebsd.org/D40575 to >> be committed? > D40575 is closely tied to the compaction patch (D40772) which is > currently on hold until another issue is solved (see D45046 and related > revisions for more details). Any idea about https://reviews.freebsd.org/D16620 ? Is D45046 supposed to replace this, or is it about something else? I wanted to try D16620, but it doesn't apply and my naive/mechanical way of applying it panics. > I didn't consider landing D40575 because of that, but I guess it could > be useful on its own. It at least gives a way to quantify with numbers resp. qualitatively visualize. And as such it may help in visualizing differences like with your guard-pages commit. I wonder if the segregation of nofree allocations may result in a similar improvement for long-running systems. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF --=_4c82248a7cf604e4aac14a20a26be955 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc; size=833 Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEER9UlYXp1PSd08nWXEg2wmwP42IYFAmY8mMoACgkQEg2wmwP4 2IZtTA//UAU+BhHhYcx9r0vnVGkhN4boRwCM6svxIecerIK25QbNcV+eRWCgYplQ 4XV/06plqhfSblHtPrxbITHbX/qgHYIYX/3RXB0/awDLlVjZNkhPNIf3MPilGjun X5ruvSaBCeNVd3yvW5oJNy69jLvjLY8AzDhGXC6rmid9vY+FAMLWakuzP5FbI2dD Vx0I6z5dzPaRRMie3kImvd6V/eduuvL136nEwv281LjtMoXWchoWSINE1HDFm/MJ TB9dL//P7cF3cFaHr3WCPsYSwfctKhjxTSVrpo1k2nFXG9fMjOBl03114yERhbhi NTYRqjiWNNnFZIAOjR1TD+mRDApR50rMA9jPahkVeBwKkl5tt+ioi5LRc/S+GvUs WMeWIgMdfTmXskzN7qNkPPNh0xUiWREXRtTEyPw7FvkUz0DKZfJjBNdTMUD8r4c9 sd6Ha3+iAPS4vAzSk1OBriFXVDlwA/C3zlZd5uIu6w0stbt5951R4w9JZu3hzvhj 6UW0Wn2bBj2d5ER1No5mhOhzw7Rck+c3gHBcGwQZpEL037+QNQUHEvMLEd0sXcpP +t7Oh9MgCCN5OmZjTqT1nb2zzp6xU7xaaWgNICVNfJsXMivGW+7Bnz0AeUG7RAB2 FmoNUCLUL1eOR3O0rvcIneTAJsn1VUoAVVpT23XpQrqGrdEY5SM= =s7/D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_4c82248a7cf604e4aac14a20a26be955--