From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@nicira.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] re-shrink 'struct page' when SLUB is on.
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:01:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131216160128.aa1f1eb8039f5eee578cf560@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131213235903.8236C539@viggo.jf.intel.com>
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 15:59:03 -0800 Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> wrote:
> SLUB depends on a 16-byte cmpxchg for an optimization. For the
> purposes of this series, I'm assuming that it is a very important
> optimization that we desperately need to keep around.
What if we don't do that.
> In order to get guaranteed 16-byte alignment (required by the
> hardware on x86), 'struct page' is padded out from 56 to 64
> bytes.
>
> Those 8-bytes matter. We've gone to great lengths to keep
> 'struct page' small in the past. It's a shame that we bloat it
> now just for alignment reasons when we have extra space. Plus,
> bloating such a commonly-touched structure *HAS* to have cache
> footprint implications.
>
> These patches attempt _internal_ alignment instead of external
> alignment for slub.
>
> I also got a bug report from some folks running a large database
> benchmark. Their old kernel uses slab and their new one uses
> slub. They were swapping and couldn't figure out why. It turned
> out to be the 2GB of RAM that the slub padding wastes on their
> system.
>
> On my box, that 2GB cost about $200 to populate back when we
> bought it. I want my $200 back.
>
> This set takes me from 16909584K of reserved memory at boot
> down to 14814472K, so almost *exactly* 2GB of savings! It also
> helps performance, presumably because it touches 14% fewer
> struct page cachelines. A 30GB dd to a ramfs file:
>
> dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=$((1<<30)) count=30
>
> is sped up by about 4.4% in my testing.
This is a gruesome and horrible tale of inefficiency and regression.
>From 5-10 minutes of gitting I couldn't see any performance testing
results for slub's cmpxchg_double stuff. I am thinking we should just
tip it all overboard unless someone can demonstrate sufficiently
serious losses from so doing.
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig~a
+++ a/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -78,7 +78,6 @@ config X86
select ANON_INODES
select HAVE_ALIGNED_STRUCT_PAGE if SLUB
select HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL
- select HAVE_CMPXCHG_DOUBLE
select HAVE_ARCH_KMEMCHECK
select HAVE_USER_RETURN_NOTIFIER
select ARCH_BINFMT_ELF_RANDOMIZE_PIE
_
--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-17 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-13 23:59 Dave Hansen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] mm: print more details for bad_page() Dave Hansen
2013-12-16 16:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-12-16 17:20 ` Andi Kleen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] mm: page->pfmemalloc only used by slab/skb Dave Hansen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] mm: slabs: reset page at free Dave Hansen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] mm: rearrange struct page Dave Hansen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] mm: slub: rearrange 'struct page' fields Dave Hansen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] mm: slub: remove 'struct page' alignment restrictions Dave Hansen
2013-12-14 3:13 ` Andi Kleen
2013-12-13 23:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] mm: slub: cleanups after code churn Dave Hansen
2013-12-17 0:01 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-12-17 0:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/7] re-shrink 'struct page' when SLUB is on Dave Hansen
2013-12-17 15:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-12-19 0:24 ` Dave Hansen
2013-12-19 0:41 ` Andrew Morton
2013-12-19 0:48 ` Dave Hansen
2013-12-19 15:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-12-19 19:14 ` Dave Hansen
2013-12-18 8:51 ` Pekka Enberg
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=20131216160128.aa1f1eb8039f5eee578cf560@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=pshelar@nicira.com \
/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