From: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
To: akpm@osdl.org, hugh@veritas.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: per_cpu_pagesets degrades MPI performance
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 14:28:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050404192827.GA15142@sgi.com> (raw)
Performnace of a number of MPI benchmarks degraded when we upgraded
from 2.4 based kernels to 2.6 based kernels. Surprisingly, we isolated
the cause of the degradation to page coloring problems caused by
the per_cpu_pagesets feature that was added to 2.6. I'm sure that
this feature is a significant win for many workloads but it is
causing degradations for MPI workloads.
I'm running on an IA64 using systems with L3 caches of 1.5MB, 3MB & 9MB. The
degradation has been seen on all systems. The L3 caches on these systems
are physically tagged & have 16 (1.5MB, 3MB) or 32 (9MB) colors.
MPI programs consist of multiple threads that are simultaneously
launched by a control thread. The threads typically allocate memory
in parallel during the initialization phase.
With per_cpu_pagesets, pages are allocated & released in small batchs.
The batch size on the test system that I used is 4. Batching allocations
introduces a bias into the colors of the pages that are assigned to
a thread and is causing excessive L3 cache misses.
I wrote a simple test program that forked 2 threads, then each thread
malloc'ed & referenced 10MB of memory. I then counted the colors of
each of the pages in the 10MB region of the 2 threads:
(color = (phys-addr / pagesize) % 16
----------- color--------------------------------------------
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Thread 0: 2 2 2 2 75 75 75 75 1 1 1 1 74 74 75 76
Thread 1: 74 74 74 74 1 1 1 1 75 76 76 76 2 2 2 2
Note that thread 0 has most of it pages with colors 4-7 & 12-15 whereas
the other thread has colors 0-3 & 8-11. This effectively cuts the size of
the L3 in half.
The threads are nicely interleaving assignments of the batches of 4 pages.
I see this same skew in page colors assigned to real user programs but it not
as bad as the example shown above. However, performance of MPI programs is
limited by the speed of the slowest thread. If only a single thread has
poor coloring, performance of all threads degrades.
I added a hack to disable the per_cpu_pagesets, the color skew disappears &
both 2.4 & 2.6 kernel perform the same.
With per_cpu_pagesets disabled, I see a tendency to assign a series of
odd pages to one thread & even pages to the other thread. However, there
appears to be enough noise in the system so that the pattern does not
persist for a long time and overall each thread has approximately the same
number of pages of each color.
I also changed the batch size to 16. (I was running on a system that had
an L3 with 16 colors). Again, the degradation disappeared.
Here is data from a real benchmark suite. The tests wer run on a
production system with 64p, 32 nodes. The numbers show the time
required to run each test. Benchmarks 1, 2 & 5 show significant
degradation caused by the per_cpu_pagesets.
- PER_CPU_PAGESETS -
TESTCASE ENABLED DISABLED RATIO
BENCHMARK1
4P 9.97 6.29 0.63
8P 5.34 3.84 0.72
16P 2.60 1.96 0.75
32P 1.64 1.07 0.65
64P 0.94 0.55 0.59
128P 0.60 0.33 0.56
BENCHMARK2
4P 3061.46 2877.89 0.94
8P 1794.32 1707.51 0.95
16P 1201.00 1129.44 0.94
32P 1017.43 932.83 0.92
BENCHMARK3
32P 3832.90 3897.00 1.02
BENCHMARK4
2P 1387.00 1378.00 0.99
4P 698.23 714.24 1.02
8P 341.71 350.20 1.02
16P 174.82 170.84 0.98
32P 73.75 81.54 1.11
BENCHMARK5
4P 761.07 757.09 0.99
8P 341.54 295.69 0.87
16P 142.38 136.37 0.96
32P 68.41 56.60 0.83
64P 35.17 34.43 0.98
BENCHMARK6
1P 155.42 154.94 1.00
2P 73.40 72.86 0.99
4P 38.43 37.25 0.97
6P 25.66 25.49 0.99
8P 19.93 19.70 0.99
12P 13.99 13.94 1.00
16P 10.98 10.85 0.99
24P 8.02 7.92 0.99
48P 5.58 5.73 1.03
Has anyone else seen this problem? I am considering adding
a config option to allow a site to control the batch size
used for per_cpu_pagesets. Are there other ideas that should
be pursued?
I should also note that the amount of memory potentially trapped in the
per_cpu_pagesets gets excessively large on big multinode systems.
I'll post another note about this, but it looks like a
256 node, 512p system can have many GB of memory in the
per_cpu_pagesets.
--
Thanks
Jack Steiner (steiner@sgi.com) 651-683-5302
Principal Engineer SGI - Silicon Graphics, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2005-04-04 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-04 19:28 Jack Steiner [this message]
2005-04-05 0:40 ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-05 3:02 ` Jack Steiner
2005-04-07 18:52 ` Jack Steiner
2005-04-08 0:41 ` Nick Piggin
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=20050404192827.GA15142@sgi.com \
--to=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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