On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 5:52 PM Usama Arif <usamaarif642@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 26/08/2025 08:42, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 26.08.25 09:19, Yafang Shao wrote: > >> Background > >> ========== > >> > >> Our production servers consistently configure THP to "never" due to > >> historical incidents caused by its behavior. Key issues include: > >> - Increased Memory Consumption > >> THP significantly raises overall memory usage, reducing available memory > >> for workloads. > >> > >> - Latency Spikes > >> Random latency spikes occur due to frequent memory compaction triggered > >> by THP. > >> > >> - Lack of Fine-Grained Control > >> THP tuning is globally configured, making it unsuitable for containerized > >> environments. When multiple workloads share a host, enabling THP without > >> per-workload control leads to unpredictable behavior. > >> > >> Due to these issues, administrators avoid switching to madvise or always > >> modes—unless per-workload THP control is implemented. > >> > >> To address this, we propose BPF-based THP policy for flexible adjustment. > >> Additionally, as David mentioned [0], this mechanism can also serve as a > >> policy prototyping tool (test policies via BPF before upstreaming them). > > > > There is a lot going on and most reviewers (including me) are fairly busy right now, so getting more detailed review could take a while. > > > > This topic sounds like a good candidate for the bi-weekly MM alignment session. > > > > Would you be interested in presenting the current bpf interface, how to use it, drawbacks, todos, ... in that forum? > > > > Could I get an invite please? Thanks! IIUC, a Google Meet link will be shared publicly on the upstream mailing list, allowing any interested developers to join. If the session is invite-only instead, I will make sure you receive an invitation, given the significant help you've already provided for this series. -- Regards Yafang
