From: "Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<kirill@shutemov.name>, <yuzhao@google.com>,
<ryan.roberts@arm.com>, <ying.huang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] lru: allow large batched add large folio to lru list
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 13:51:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d4f938e-4f0a-bb97-3890-910b5838d6f5@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZE2bm1I/d+kbGBNF@casper.infradead.org>
Hi Matthew,
On 4/30/2023 6:35 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 04:27:59PM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
>> @@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ struct address_space;
>> struct pagevec {
>> unsigned char nr;
>> bool percpu_pvec_drained;
>> + unsigned short nr_pages;
>
> I still don't like storing nr_pages in the pagevec/folio_batch.
>
What about the change like following:
diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
index 57cb01b042f6..5e7e9c0734ab 100644
--- a/mm/swap.c
+++ b/mm/swap.c
@@ -228,8 +228,10 @@ static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
static void folio_batch_add_and_move(struct folio_batch *fbatch,
struct folio *folio, move_fn_t move_fn)
{
- if (folio_batch_add(fbatch, folio) && !folio_test_large(folio) &&
- !lru_cache_disabled())
+ int nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
+
+ if (folio_batch_add(fbatch, folio) && !lru_cache_disabled() &&
+ (!folio_test_large(folio) || (nr_pages <= (PAGEVEC_SIZE + 1))))
return;
folio_batch_move_lru(fbatch, move_fn);
}
I did testing about the lru lock contention with different folio size
with will-it-scale + deferred queue lock contention mitigated:
- If large folio size is 16K (order 2), the lru lock takes 64.31% cpu runtime
- If large folio size is 64K (order 4), the lru lock takes 24.24% cpu runtime
This is as our expectation: The larger size of folio, the less lru lock
contention.
It's acceptable to not batched operate on large folio which is large
enough. PAGEVEC_SIZE + 1 is chosen here based on following reasons:
- acceptable max memory size per batch: 15 x 16 x 4096 = 983040 bytes
- the folios with size larger than it will not apply batched operation.
But the lru lock contention is not high already.
I collected data with lru contention when run will-it-scale.page_fault1:
folio with order 2:
Without the change:
- 64.31% 0.23% page_fault1_pro [kernel.kallsyms] [k] folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
+ 64.07% folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
With the change:
- 21.55% 0.21% page_fault1_pro [kernel.kallsyms] [k] folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
+ 21.34% folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
folio with order 4:
Without the change:
- 24.24% 0.15% page_fault1_pro [kernel.kallsyms] [k] folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
+ 24.09% folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
With the change:
- 2.20% 0.09% page_fault1_pro [kernel.kallsyms] [k] folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
+ 2.11% folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
folio with order 5:
- 8.21% 0.16% page_fault1_pro [kernel.kallsyms] [k] folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
+ 8.05% folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave
Regards
Yin, Fengwei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-05 5:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-29 8:27 [PATCH v3 0/2] Reduce lock contention related with large folio Yin Fengwei
2023-04-29 8:27 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] THP: avoid lock when check whether THP is in deferred list Yin Fengwei
2023-05-04 11:48 ` kirill
2023-05-05 1:09 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-05-29 2:58 ` Yin Fengwei
2023-05-05 0:52 ` Huang, Ying
2023-05-05 1:09 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-04-29 8:27 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] lru: allow large batched add large folio to lru list Yin Fengwei
2023-04-29 22:35 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-05-01 5:52 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-05-05 5:51 ` Yin, Fengwei [this message]
2023-05-15 2:14 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-06-20 3:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 4:39 ` Yin Fengwei
2023-06-20 8:01 ` Yin Fengwei
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=8d4f938e-4f0a-bb97-3890-910b5838d6f5@intel.com \
--to=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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