linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: prefetch buddy while not holding lock
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 16:27:56 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180302082756.GC6356@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180301160950.b561d6b8b561217bad511229@linux-foundation.org>

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 04:09:50PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu,  1 Mar 2018 14:28:45 +0800 Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > When a page is freed back to the global pool, its buddy will be checked
> > to see if it's possible to do a merge. This requires accessing buddy's
> > page structure and that access could take a long time if it's cache cold.
> > 
> > This patch adds a prefetch to the to-be-freed page's buddy outside of
> > zone->lock in hope of accessing buddy's page structure later under
> > zone->lock will be faster. Since we *always* do buddy merging and check
> > an order-0 page's buddy to try to merge it when it goes into the main
> > allocator, the cacheline will always come in, i.e. the prefetched data
> > will never be unused.
> > 
> > In the meantime, there are two concerns:
> > 1 the prefetch could potentially evict existing cachelines, especially
> >   for L1D cache since it is not huge;
> > 2 there is some additional instruction overhead, namely calculating
> >   buddy pfn twice.
> > 
> > For 1, it's hard to say, this microbenchmark though shows good result but
> > the actual benefit of this patch will be workload/CPU dependant;
> > For 2, since the calculation is a XOR on two local variables, it's expected
> > in many cases that cycles spent will be offset by reduced memory latency
> > later. This is especially true for NUMA machines where multiple CPUs are
> > contending on zone->lock and the most time consuming part under zone->lock
> > is the wait of 'struct page' cacheline of the to-be-freed pages and their
> > buddies.
> > 
> > Test with will-it-scale/page_fault1 full load:
> > 
> > kernel      Broadwell(2S)  Skylake(2S)   Broadwell(4S)  Skylake(4S)
> > v4.16-rc2+  9034215        7971818       13667135       15677465
> > patch2/3    9536374 +5.6%  8314710 +4.3% 14070408 +3.0% 16675866 +6.4%
> > this patch 10338868 +8.4%  8544477 +2.8% 14839808 +5.5% 17155464 +2.9%
> > Note: this patch's performance improvement percent is against patch2/3.
> > 
> > ...
> >
> > @@ -1150,6 +1153,18 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zone *zone, int count,
> >  				continue;
> >  
> >  			list_add_tail(&page->lru, &head);
> > +
> > +			/*
> > +			 * We are going to put the page back to the global
> > +			 * pool, prefetch its buddy to speed up later access
> > +			 * under zone->lock. It is believed the overhead of
> > +			 * calculating buddy_pfn here can be offset by reduced
> > +			 * memory latency later.
> > +			 */
> > +			pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> > +			buddy_pfn = __find_buddy_pfn(pfn, 0);
> > +			buddy = page + (buddy_pfn - pfn);
> > +			prefetch(buddy);
> 
> What is the typical list length here?  Maybe it's approximately the pcp
> batch size which is typically 128 pages?

Most of time it is pcp->batch, unless when pcp's pages need to be
all drained like in drain_local_pages(zone).

The pcp->batch has a default value of 31 and its upper limit is 96 for
x86_64. For this test, it is 31 here, I didn't manipulate
/proc/sys/vm/percpu_pagelist_fraction to change it.

With this said, the count here could be pcp->count when pcp's pages
need to be all drained and though pcp->count's default value is
(6*pcp->batch)=186, user can increase that value through the above
mentioned procfs interface and the resulting pcp->count could be too
big for prefetch. Ying also mentioned this today and suggested adding
an upper limit here to avoid prefetching too much. Perhaps just prefetch
the last pcp->batch pages if count here > pcp->batch? Since pcp->batch
has an upper limit, we won't need to worry prefetching too much.

> 
> If so, I'm a bit surprised that it is effective to prefetch 128 page
> frames before using any them for real.  I guess they'll fit in the L2
> cache.   Thoughts?

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-02  8:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-01  6:28 [PATCH v4 0/3] mm: improve zone->lock scalability Aaron Lu
2018-03-01  6:28 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: update pcp->count inside Aaron Lu
2018-03-01 12:11   ` David Rientjes
2018-03-01 13:45   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-12 13:22   ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-13  2:11     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-01  6:28 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free Aaron Lu
2018-03-01 13:55   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-02  7:15     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-02 15:34       ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-02  7:31     ` Huang, Ying
2018-03-02  0:01   ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-02  8:01     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-02 21:23       ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-02 21:25         ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-12 14:22   ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-13  3:34     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-22 15:17       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-26  3:03         ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-01  6:28 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: prefetch buddy while not holding lock Aaron Lu
2018-03-01 14:00   ` Michal Hocko
2018-03-02  8:31     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-02 17:55     ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-02 18:00       ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-02 18:08         ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-05 11:41       ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-05 11:48         ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-06  7:55         ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-06 12:27           ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-06 12:53             ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-02  0:09   ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-02  8:27     ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-03-09  8:24       ` [PATCH v4 3/3 update] " Aaron Lu
2018-03-09 21:58         ` Andrew Morton
2018-03-10 14:46           ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-12 15:05           ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-12 17:32         ` Dave Hansen
2018-03-13  3:35           ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-13  7:04             ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-20  9:50               ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-20 11:31                 ` [PATCH v4 3/3 update2] " Aaron Lu

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=20180302082756.GC6356@intel.com \
    --to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.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