From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.com>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Pintu Kumar <pintu.k@samsung.com>,
Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>, Gioh Kim <gioh.kim@lge.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] mm, page_alloc: Delete the zonelist_cache
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:47:35 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1507211640480.12650@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437379219-9160-2-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.com>
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
>
> The zonelist cache (zlc) was introduced to skip over zones that were
> recently known to be full. At the time the paths it bypassed were the
> cpuset checks, the watermark calculations and zone_reclaim. The situation
> today is different and the complexity of zlc is harder to justify.
>
> 1) The cpuset checks are no-ops unless a cpuset is active and in general are
> a lot cheaper.
>
> 2) zone_reclaim is now disabled by default and I suspect that was a large
> source of the cost that zlc wanted to avoid. When it is enabled, it's
> known to be a major source of stalling when nodes fill up and it's
> unwise to hit every other user with the overhead.
>
> 3) Watermark checks are expensive to calculate for high-order
> allocation requests. Later patches in this series will reduce the cost of
> the watermark checking.
>
> 4) The most important issue is that in the current implementation it
> is possible for a failed THP allocation to mark a zone full for order-0
> allocations and cause a fallback to remote nodes.
>
> The last issue could be addressed with additional complexity but it's
> not clear that we need zlc at all so this patch deletes it. If stalls
> due to repeated zone_reclaim are ever reported as an issue then we should
> introduce deferring logic based on a timeout inside zone_reclaim itself
> and leave the page allocator fast paths alone.
>
> Impact on page-allocator microbenchmarks is negligible as they don't hit
> the paths where the zlc comes into play. The impact was noticable in
> a workload called "stutter". One part uses a lot of anonymous memory,
> a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file. In an
> ideal world the latency application would not notice the mmap latency.
> On a 4-node machine the results of this patch are
>
> 4-node machine stutter
> 4.2.0-rc1 4.2.0-rc1
> vanilla nozlc-v1r20
> Min mmap 53.9902 ( 0.00%) 49.3629 ( 8.57%)
> 1st-qrtle mmap 54.6776 ( 0.00%) 54.1201 ( 1.02%)
> 2nd-qrtle mmap 54.9242 ( 0.00%) 54.5961 ( 0.60%)
> 3rd-qrtle mmap 55.1817 ( 0.00%) 54.9338 ( 0.45%)
> Max-90% mmap 55.3952 ( 0.00%) 55.3929 ( 0.00%)
> Max-93% mmap 55.4766 ( 0.00%) 57.5712 ( -3.78%)
> Max-95% mmap 55.5522 ( 0.00%) 57.8376 ( -4.11%)
> Max-99% mmap 55.7938 ( 0.00%) 63.6180 (-14.02%)
> Max mmap 6344.0292 ( 0.00%) 67.2477 ( 98.94%)
> Mean mmap 57.3732 ( 0.00%) 54.5680 ( 4.89%)
>
> Note the maximum stall latency which was 6 seconds and becomes 67ms with
> this patch applied. However, also note that it is not guaranteed this
> benchmark always hits pathelogical cases and the milage varies. There is
> a secondary impact with more direct reclaim because zones are now being
> considered instead of being skipped by zlc.
>
> 4.1.0 4.1.0
> vanilla nozlc-v1r4
> Swap Ins 838 502
> Swap Outs 1149395 2622895
> DMA32 allocs 17839113 15863747
> Normal allocs 129045707 137847920
> Direct pages scanned 4070089 29046893
> Kswapd pages scanned 17147837 17140694
> Kswapd pages reclaimed 17146691 17139601
> Direct pages reclaimed 1888879 4886630
> Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
> Kswapd velocity 17523.721 17518.928
> Direct efficiency 46% 16%
> Direct velocity 4159.306 29687.854
> Percentage direct scans 19% 62%
> Page writes by reclaim 1149395.000 2622895.000
> Page writes file 0 0
> Page writes anon 1149395 2622895
>
> The direct page scan and reclaim rates are noticable. It is possible
> this will not be a universal win on all workloads but cycling through
> zonelists waiting for zlc->last_full_zap to expire is not the right
> decision.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
I don't use a config that uses cpusets to restrict memory allocation
anymore, but it'd be interesting to see the impact that the spinlock and
cpuset hierarchy scan has for non-hardwalled allocations.
This removed the #define MAX_ZONELISTS 1 for UMA configs, which will cause
build errors, but once that's fixed:
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
I'm glad to see this go.
--
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:[~2015-07-21 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-20 8:00 [RFC PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 01/10] mm, page_alloc: Delete the zonelist_cache Mel Gorman
2015-07-21 23:47 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2015-07-23 10:58 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 02/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary parameter from zone_watermark_ok_safe Mel Gorman
2015-07-21 23:49 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-28 12:20 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 03/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary recalculations for dirty zone balancing Mel Gorman
2015-07-22 0:08 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-23 12:28 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 12:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 04/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary taking of a seqlock when cpusets are disabled Mel Gorman
2015-07-22 0:11 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-28 12:32 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 05/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary updating of GFP flags during normal operation Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 13:36 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-28 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-28 15:48 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 06/10] mm, page_alloc: Use jump label to check if page grouping by mobility is enabled Mel Gorman
2015-07-28 13:42 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 07/10] mm, page_alloc: Use masks and shifts when converting GFP flags to migrate types Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 08/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove MIGRATE_RESERVE Mel Gorman
2015-07-29 9:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-29 12:25 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 09/10] mm, page_alloc: Reserve pageblocks for high-order atomic allocations on demand Mel Gorman
2015-07-29 11:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-29 12:53 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 8:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31 8:43 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 5:54 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 7:11 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 7:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31 8:22 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 8:30 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 8:26 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 8:41 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-20 8:00 ` [PATCH 10/10] mm, page_alloc: Only enforce watermarks for order-0 allocations Mel Gorman
2015-07-29 12:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-29 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 6:08 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 7:19 ` Mel Gorman
2015-07-31 8:40 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 6:14 ` [RFC PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking Joonsoo Kim
2015-07-31 7:20 ` Mel Gorman
2015-08-12 10:45 [PATCH 00/10] Remove zonelist cache and high-order watermark checking v2 Mel Gorman
2015-08-12 10:45 ` [PATCH 01/10] mm, page_alloc: Delete the zonelist_cache Mel Gorman
2015-08-20 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-20 13:42 ` Mel Gorman
2015-08-21 9:29 ` Michal Hocko
2015-08-20 13:30 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-08-20 14:17 ` Mel Gorman
2015-08-20 14:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=alpine.DEB.2.10.1507211640480.12650@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=gioh.kim@lge.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.com \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=pintu.k@samsung.com \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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