From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@google.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: MM global locks as core counts quadruple
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:35:45 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <07e7d078-0c9d-6a1f-1ab5-295f86974b72@google.com> (raw)
Hi all,
As core counts are rapidly expanding over the next four years, Namhyung
and I were looking at global locks that we're already seeing high
contention on even today.
Some of these are not MM specific:
- cgroup_mutex
- cgroup_threadgroup_rwsem
- tasklist_lock
- kernfs_mutex (although should now be substantially better with the
kernfs_locks array)
Others *are* MM specific:
- list_lrus_mutex
- pcpu_drain_mutex
- shrinker_mutex (formerly shrinker_rwsem)
- vmap_purge_lock
- slab_mutex
This is only looking at fleet data for global static locks, not locks like
zone->lock that get dynamically allocated.
(mmap_lock was substantially improved by per-vma locking, although does
show up for very large vmas.)
Couple questions:
(1) How are people quantifying these pain points, if at all, in synthetic
testing? Any workloads or benchmarks that are really good at doing
this in the lab beyond the traditional will-it-scale? (The above is
from production data.)
(2) Is anybody working on any of the above global locks? Trying to
surface gaps for locks that will likely become even more painful in
the coming years.
Thanks!
next reply other threads:[~2024-06-21 0:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-21 0:35 David Rientjes [this message]
2024-06-21 2:01 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-06-21 2:46 ` Yafang Shao
2024-06-21 2:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-06-26 19:38 ` Karim Manaouil
2024-06-27 5:36 ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-06-21 19:10 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-21 21:37 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-06-23 17:59 ` Tejun Heo
2024-06-24 21:44 ` David Rientjes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=07e7d078-0c9d-6a1f-1ab5-295f86974b72@google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=namhyung@google.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox