All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: tj@kernel.org
Cc: Metathronius Galabant <m.galabant@googlemail.com>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrian Drzewiecki <z@drze.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [slub p2 0/4] SLUB: [RFC] Per cpu partial lists V2
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 10:32:44 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110620153244.214038140@linux.com> (raw)

The following patchset applied on top of the lockless patchset V7. It
introduces per cpu partial lists which allow a performance increase of
around ~15 during contention for the nodelock (can be tested using
hackbench).

These lists help to avoid per nodelocking overhead. Allocator latency
could be further reduced by making these operations work without
disabling interrupts (like the fastpath and the free slowpath) as well as
implementing better ways of handling ther cpu array with partial pages.

I am still not satisfied with the cleanliness of the code after these
changes. Some review with suggestions as to how to restructure the
code given these changes in operations would be appreciated.

It is interesting to note that BSD has gone to a scheme with partial
pages only per cpu (source: Adrian). Transfer of cpu ownerships is
done using IPIs. Probably too much overhead for our taste. The use
of a few per cpu partial pages looks to be beneficial though.

Note that there is no performance gain when there is no contention.

Performance:

				Before		After
./hackbench 100 process 200000
				Time: 2299.072	1742.454
./hackbench 100 process 20000
				Time: 224.654	182.393
./hackbench 100 process 20000
				Time: 227.126	182.780
./hackbench 100 process 20000
				Time: 219.608	182.899
./hackbench 10 process 20000
				Time: 21.769	18.756
./hackbench 10 process 20000
				Time: 21.657	18.938
./hackbench 10 process 20000
				Time: 23.193	19.537
./hackbench 1 process 20000
				Time: 2.337	2.263
./hackbench 1 process 20000
				Time: 2.223	2.271
./hackbench 1 process 20000
				Time: 2.269	2.301



             reply	other threads:[~2011-06-20 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-20 15:32 Christoph Lameter [this message]
2011-06-20 15:32 ` [slub p2 1/4] slub: Prepare inuse field in new_slab() Christoph Lameter
2011-06-20 15:32 ` [slub p2 2/4] slub: pass kmem_cache_cpu pointer to get_partial() Christoph Lameter
2011-06-20 15:32 ` [slub p2 3/4] slub: return object pointer from get_partial() / new_slab() Christoph Lameter
2011-06-20 15:32 ` [slub p2 4/4] slub: [RFC] per cpu cache for partial pages Christoph Lameter
2011-06-20 19:42 ` [slub p2 0/4] SLUB: [RFC] Per cpu partial lists V2 Andi Kleen
2011-06-20 20:01   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 19:05 ` 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=20110620153244.214038140@linux.com \
    --to=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --cc=rientjes@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.