From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80FEFC48BF8 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:52:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D74A96B007E; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:52:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D24B16B0080; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:52:15 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id BEC676B0081; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:52:15 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03AD6B007E for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:52:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0048E160D76 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:52:14 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81819427788.19.89280B1 Received: from mail-lf1-f45.google.com (mail-lf1-f45.google.com [209.85.167.45]) by imf20.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B6C1C0017 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:52:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf20.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=TPHwWzLB; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf20.hostedemail.com: domain of urezki@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=urezki@gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1708606333; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=R4bu1C98vBLZH7tB289/lMNViA1falfSyt+9+Xa4zfw=; b=4GdEglY/oIqXDq9WUitZ/wEhrNTw8BJdbTo1C+QlY5Nib+Lq62NEyxVAfq/6qh7XB9kW2w Q1pauA6HHtciPS2IfdsFqiEJAWAn2wpdEvqQGxfiR7D7oGRFBVB8mbzu7AC0Z7zPAZENNm 6kL5SkaBMy5M11YKYE9HvuucwkgxG2w= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf20.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=TPHwWzLB; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf20.hostedemail.com: domain of urezki@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=urezki@gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1708606333; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=HqGtdKXv4XNBpgMOU0N6d6whkL/fBuWBM5FGKj0oXbTFm7YxNeoM8QhmQhEZv36HPWcKZz ce3KlO6FirZG/JLUjqjOB5cl/QfEX5OgXLLn+S6ZAal5z8/ak3xrzJyDR0nfTg/+8/I0yF rGsy+oB7LxbGb2OO1QVCqfzrKK4FlVE= Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-512d8fe4fceso1068205e87.3 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 04:52:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1708606331; x=1709211131; darn=kvack.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=R4bu1C98vBLZH7tB289/lMNViA1falfSyt+9+Xa4zfw=; b=TPHwWzLBmVCjZcmP9QMHGhsTFiCxnJLSxIgoxXGn5FxdeP3hbZinpZkzyHDheoeLhC MIAXzMd4hfgZ5030+ylRhbFINu8mvhdy/5+7lCCghX1CfMIv6INWP871r0fugOb6oM65 Bw2B7pYA4dfPBIqLzWSq/ASEJQbk+u8l12+2+nfo/RMMzBXRqKy26p5toTjaKb1j53Hx Hp2/RqXDqrbBsaf5/hKT2kOWxvyDlI8o9hY2yLX27+9jkIYXta3o14uGOA6qe1mcUQta 6dqvTTE9Z7QcaMwSdFl2qKuGIt5WvY/Nf7687RnGp5Judw4DXNzJ7xDmasC3rn//3hQn rwEg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708606331; x=1709211131; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=R4bu1C98vBLZH7tB289/lMNViA1falfSyt+9+Xa4zfw=; b=NjGbIxcqWmRgJCDjcW4j8oUEYFVmcolab0l/BnPG/8b4hzfufvVPcDSJ4CGMGW+Pot 9ypomp3kdJ/DUXuAId//vlO9NwGHhmDcuwq3eJn2v3Ob22Xo2luLtsgoUepVMBRGphcA cCaP0YLv0SDmRFEgbQD1C3PlotMeOG6ug9BBeElQC8bGewH39ij7iAKwdbkZ4MiYzMRo PB3WRFEYNV/jLGMp2e6lgJ5Pmrn4MBuGkM+bDRQVpb05z5GTOwa94QJJ9Ltaa7Vd15g4 1h+OSxFTu1I+W2SjlpKeR1e2t/li5MXvA0bq15y8LwmdYK6o8a85GOSj6UF3tf+8bNeH c/Xw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXoyNDXc4LXZfjzE1bwqBFX54WCgoUfZC0lrZiwgYZk1F0mKZKwdzbNXj3oaK4dLG1PB4nS9PaBQjz+HYPO27X72fk= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzKKjUBeLbCCPClojfmN1TbqaAdDIHhizrJzekAPJnXRDiwFo0k MsIsS5Ga6Kf7i8YK2N1V9TzImjhgCQhXeQlRiOUEmaBHAGAQnyFL X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFWLo128zbfkmgYSAlGiHCEt+v/eP6YfSG4/bgRWkA1/NShAOAiBcjXHq1XsveclTlN71ur0Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2209:b0:512:b0c1:3bb2 with SMTP id h9-20020a056512220900b00512b0c13bb2mr11453210lfu.46.1708606330867; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 04:52:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from pc636 (host-90-233-206-150.mobileonline.telia.com. [90.233.206.150]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k24-20020a192d18000000b00512ab0bb96dsm1882817lfj.57.2024.02.22.04.52.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 22 Feb 2024 04:52:10 -0800 (PST) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 13:52:07 +0100 To: rulinhuang Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, urezki@gmail.com, colin.king@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lstoakes@gmail.com, tianyou.li@intel.com, tim.c.chen@intel.com, wangyang.guo@intel.com, zhiguo.zhou@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/vmalloc: lock contention optimization under multi-threading Message-ID: References: <20240222121045.216556-1-rulin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240222121045.216556-1-rulin.huang@intel.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 04B6C1C0017 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Stat-Signature: qf7p5dgwjw1srp7mwrg1q8dkfoep8q13 X-HE-Tag: 1708606332-22672 X-HE-Meta: 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 vYH+qu7J QM5k4Zdg6s5hg7HUHyZvvHSdezxpRDi5Sk19RKTvcvqo2VuWUE2xgegJzQ9snWQdewzLy5avYp+oMO+1wQrJ3svSaJGUbQ+uGhUbwZPnULTLUAGgT79K8HA+CTKTfcErdsm0jl8rTQ4hNi6VG8feblPU9MX5PTdum0dKujIGslFUZiVVO1HbBD9W8mzsmzMKTFJ0ecI3ctrzz+/wb5g4zZc7/JMu9ERNlG73m5cx/QFKGcX8lq6wL3AVWwY/W0yuRFXN59hhl8Unj1f+N+BaEoBpQBnRgiJqHvhQoRANiLxnH3Dy+R36MnDsKv90lX4NAugCA+f5/jPQ3eL1ubk6K11rXih07Euh2Xv1vrp8hj1BqxTBaT06mutY2EZCyIMyNmSsBca4cK/Wr7KNElkqwuMG3oBZd1IDv8YeqgAg/3489oW0= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.026676, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Hello, Rulinhuang! > Hi Uladzislau and Andrew, we have rebased it(Patch v4) on branch > mm-unstable and remeasured it. Could you kindly help confirm if > this is the right base to work on? > Compared to the previous result at kernel v6.7 with a 5% performance > gain on intel icelake(160 vcpu), we only had a 0.6% with this commit > base. But we think our modification still has some significance. On > the one hand, this does reduce a critical section. On the other hand, > we have a 4% performance gain on intel sapphire rapids(224 vcpu), > which suggests more performance improvement would likely be achieved > when the core count of processors increases to hundreds or > even thousands. > Thank you again for your comments. > According to the patch that was a correct rebase. Right a small delta on your 160 CPUs is because of removing a contention. As for bigger systems it is bigger impact, like you point here on your 224 vcpu results where you see %4 perf improvement. So we should fix it. But the way how it is fixed is not optimal from my point of view, because the patch that is in question spreads the internals from alloc_vmap_area(), like inserting busy area, across many parts now. -- Uladzislau Rezki