From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Sun Sep 2 15:27:00 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AE8FF20F4 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 15:27:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Received: from www.zefox.net (www.zefox.net [50.1.20.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "www.zefox.org", Issuer "www.zefox.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08C697C6AF for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 15:26:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Received: from www.zefox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.zefox.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w82FRHcs045928 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 2 Sep 2018 08:27:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd@www.zefox.net) Received: (from fbsd@localhost) by www.zefox.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w82FRHx9045927; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 08:27:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fbsd) Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2018 08:27:17 -0700 From: bob prohaska To: Mark Millard Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, bob prohaska Subject: Re: RPI3 swap experiments (r338342 with vm.pageout_oom_seq="1024") Message-ID: <20180902152717.GB44384@www.zefox.net> References: <20180814014226.GA50013@www.zefox.net> <20180815013612.GB51051@www.zefox.net> <20180815225504.GB59074@www.zefox.net> <20180901230233.GA42895@www.zefox.net> <20180902083217.GA44384@www.zefox.net> <6B8E28DC-075D-4829-9BEA-F36DDB1E2A25@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6B8E28DC-075D-4829-9BEA-F36DDB1E2A25@yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2018 15:27:00 -0000 On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 06:57:15AM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > Was this with or without (presuming a ufs file system): > > tunefs: trim: (-t) enabled > > ? If enabled, with or without: > > sysctl vfs.ffs.dotrimcons=1 > > In other words: was "consolidation of TRIM / BIO_DELETE > commands to the UFS/FFS filesystem" enabled? Disabled? > No, it was not. By all accounts TRIM enabling won't affect USB2.0 devices, and it's fairly clear the bottleneck is in USB, not microSD. Trim is enabled for mmcsd0s2a, but sysctl vfs.ffs.dotrimcons=1 hasn't been invoked. I'll turn it on later, to check for bad side effects, but there's no obvious reason to think it'll help. At the moment the diskscript is reporting: dT: 10.005s w: 10.000s L(q) ops/s r/s kBps ms/r w/s kBps ms/w d/s kBps ms/d %busy Name 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 9 5.2 0 0 0.0 0.2 mmcsd0 10 0 0 0 0.0 0 2 13790 0 0 0.0 89.9 da0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 2 3.9 0 0 0.0 0.1 mmcsd0s2b 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 9 5.2 0 0 0.0 0.2 mmcsd0s2 9 0 0 0 0.0 0 2 13790 0 0 0.0 89.9 da0b Sun Sep 2 08:17:14 PDT 2018 Device 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity /dev/da0b 1048576 494352 554224 47% /dev/mmcsd0s2b 1048576 478860 569716 46% Total 2097152 973212 1123940 46% Sep 2 08:14:38 www kernel: swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 1649558, size: 4096 Sep 2 08:14:38 www kernel: swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 1654590, size: 16384 Top is reporting ~10-50% idle time, not surprising given delays writing to da0b. I was hoping the pager might favor microSD given the much faster I/O times, but evidently not. Seems to be a strict round-robin division of labor. Thanks for reading! bob prohaska