From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Robin Holt <robinmholt@gmail.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 00/11] split page table lock for PMD tables
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 11:49:27 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131008084927.BC193E0090@blue.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131007160907.3a4aca3e7eae404767ed3a8e@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 16:54:02 +0300 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Alex Thorlton noticed that some massively threaded workloads work poorly,
> > if THP enabled. This patchset fixes this by introducing split page table
> > lock for PMD tables. hugetlbfs is not covered yet.
> >
> > This patchset is based on work by Naoya Horiguchi.
>
> I think I'll summarise the results thusly:
>
> : THP off, v3.12-rc2: 18.059261877 seconds time elapsed
> : THP off, patched: 16.768027318 seconds time elapsed
> :
> : THP on, v3.12-rc2: 42.162306788 seconds time elapsed
> : THP on, patched: 8.397885779 seconds time elapsed
> :
> : HUGETLB, v3.12-rc2: 47.574936948 seconds time elapsed
> : HUGETLB, patched: 19.447481153 seconds time elapsed
>
> What sort of machines are we talking about here? Can mortals expect to
> see such results on their hardware, or is this mainly on SGI nuttyware?
I've tested on 4 socket Westmere: 40 cores / 80 threads.
With 4 threads, I can see 8% improvement on THP.
Nothing comparing to 36 times on Alex's 512 cores, but still...
> I'm seeing very few reviewed-by's and acked-by's in here, which is a
> bit surprising and disappointing for a large patchset at v5. Are you
> sure none were missed?
Peter looked through, but I haven't got any tags from him.
> The new code is enabled only for x86. Why is this?
x86 is the only hardware I have to test.
> What must arch maintainers do to enable it? Have you any particular
> suggestions, warnings etc to make their lives easier?
The last patch is a good illustration what need to be done. It's very
straight forward, I don't see any pitfalls.
> I assume the patchset won't damage bisectability? If our bisecter has
> only the first eight patches applied, the fact that
> CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK cannot be enabled protects from
> failures?
Unless CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK defined, pmd_lockptr() will
return mm->page_table_lock: we can convert code to new api stet-by-step
without breaking anything.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Robin Holt <robinmholt@gmail.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 00/11] split page table lock for PMD tables
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 11:49:27 +0300 (EEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131008084927.BC193E0090@blue.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131007160907.3a4aca3e7eae404767ed3a8e@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2013 16:54:02 +0300 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Alex Thorlton noticed that some massively threaded workloads work poorly,
> > if THP enabled. This patchset fixes this by introducing split page table
> > lock for PMD tables. hugetlbfs is not covered yet.
> >
> > This patchset is based on work by Naoya Horiguchi.
>
> I think I'll summarise the results thusly:
>
> : THP off, v3.12-rc2: 18.059261877 seconds time elapsed
> : THP off, patched: 16.768027318 seconds time elapsed
> :
> : THP on, v3.12-rc2: 42.162306788 seconds time elapsed
> : THP on, patched: 8.397885779 seconds time elapsed
> :
> : HUGETLB, v3.12-rc2: 47.574936948 seconds time elapsed
> : HUGETLB, patched: 19.447481153 seconds time elapsed
>
> What sort of machines are we talking about here? Can mortals expect to
> see such results on their hardware, or is this mainly on SGI nuttyware?
I've tested on 4 socket Westmere: 40 cores / 80 threads.
With 4 threads, I can see 8% improvement on THP.
Nothing comparing to 36 times on Alex's 512 cores, but still...
> I'm seeing very few reviewed-by's and acked-by's in here, which is a
> bit surprising and disappointing for a large patchset at v5. Are you
> sure none were missed?
Peter looked through, but I haven't got any tags from him.
> The new code is enabled only for x86. Why is this?
x86 is the only hardware I have to test.
> What must arch maintainers do to enable it? Have you any particular
> suggestions, warnings etc to make their lives easier?
The last patch is a good illustration what need to be done. It's very
straight forward, I don't see any pitfalls.
> I assume the patchset won't damage bisectability? If our bisecter has
> only the first eight patches applied, the fact that
> CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK cannot be enabled protects from
> failures?
Unless CONFIG_ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK defined, pmd_lockptr() will
return mm->page_table_lock: we can convert code to new api stet-by-step
without breaking anything.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-08 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-07 13:54 [PATCHv5 00/11] split page table lock for PMD tables Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 01/11] mm: avoid increase sizeof(struct page) due to split page table lock Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 02/11] mm: rename USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS to USE_SPLIT_PTE_PTLOCKS Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 03/11] mm: convert mm->nr_ptes to atomic_long_t Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 04/11] mm: introduce api for split page table lock for PMD level Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 05/11] mm, thp: change pmd_trans_huge_lock() to return taken lock Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 06/11] mm, thp: move ptl taking inside page_check_address_pmd() Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 07/11] mm, thp: do not access mm->pmd_huge_pte directly Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 08/11] mm, hugetlb: convert hugetlbfs to use split pmd lock Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 09/11] mm: convent the rest to new page table lock api Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 10/11] mm: implement split page table lock for PMD level Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` [PATCHv5 11/11] x86, mm: enable " Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 13:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-07 16:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-10-07 16:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-10-07 23:09 ` [PATCHv5 00/11] split page table lock for PMD tables Andrew Morton
2013-10-07 23:09 ` Andrew Morton
2013-10-08 8:49 ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2013-10-08 8:49 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-08 9:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-08 9:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-08 9:50 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2013-10-08 9:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-08 9:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-08 10:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-08 10:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-08 9:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-08 9:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20131008084927.BC193E0090@blue.fi.intel.com \
--to=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=athorlton@sgi.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=robinmholt@gmail.com \
--cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.