From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fadvise: avoid expensive remote LRU cache draining after FADV_DONTNEED
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:55:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161212155552.GA7148@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cc0eb6f-bede-a34a-522b-e30d06723ffa@suse.cz>
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:21:24AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 12/10/2016 06:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > When FADV_DONTNEED cannot drop all pages in the range, it observes
> > that some pages might still be on per-cpu LRU caches after recent
> > instantiation and so initiates remote calls to all CPUs to flush their
> > local caches. However, in most cases, the fadvise happens from the
> > same context that instantiated the pages, and any pre-LRU pages in the
> > specified range are most likely sitting on the local CPU's LRU cache,
> > and so in many cases this results in unnecessary remote calls, which,
> > in a loaded system, can hold up the fadvise() call significantly.
>
> Got any numbers for this part?
I didn't record it in the extreme case we observed, unfortunately. We
had a slow-to-respond system and noticed it spending seconds in
lru_add_drain_all() after fadvise calls, and this patch came out of
thinking about the code and how we commonly call FADV_DONTNEED.
FWIW, I wrote a silly directory tree walker/searcher that recurses
through /usr to read and FADV_DONTNEED each file it finds. On a 2
socket 40 ht machine, over 1% is spent in lru_add_drain_all(). With
the patch, that cost is gone; the local drain cost shows at 0.09%.
> > Try to avoid the remote call by flushing the local LRU cache before
> > even attempting to invalidate anything. It's a cheap operation, and
> > the local LRU cache is the most likely to hold any pre-LRU pages in
> > the specified fadvise range.
>
> Anyway it looks like things can't be worse after this patch, so...
>
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Thanks!
--
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: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fadvise: avoid expensive remote LRU cache draining after FADV_DONTNEED
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:55:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161212155552.GA7148@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cc0eb6f-bede-a34a-522b-e30d06723ffa@suse.cz>
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:21:24AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 12/10/2016 06:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > When FADV_DONTNEED cannot drop all pages in the range, it observes
> > that some pages might still be on per-cpu LRU caches after recent
> > instantiation and so initiates remote calls to all CPUs to flush their
> > local caches. However, in most cases, the fadvise happens from the
> > same context that instantiated the pages, and any pre-LRU pages in the
> > specified range are most likely sitting on the local CPU's LRU cache,
> > and so in many cases this results in unnecessary remote calls, which,
> > in a loaded system, can hold up the fadvise() call significantly.
>
> Got any numbers for this part?
I didn't record it in the extreme case we observed, unfortunately. We
had a slow-to-respond system and noticed it spending seconds in
lru_add_drain_all() after fadvise calls, and this patch came out of
thinking about the code and how we commonly call FADV_DONTNEED.
FWIW, I wrote a silly directory tree walker/searcher that recurses
through /usr to read and FADV_DONTNEED each file it finds. On a 2
socket 40 ht machine, over 1% is spent in lru_add_drain_all(). With
the patch, that cost is gone; the local drain cost shows at 0.09%.
> > Try to avoid the remote call by flushing the local LRU cache before
> > even attempting to invalidate anything. It's a cheap operation, and
> > the local LRU cache is the most likely to hold any pre-LRU pages in
> > the specified fadvise range.
>
> Anyway it looks like things can't be worse after this patch, so...
>
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-12 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-10 17:26 [PATCH] mm: fadvise: avoid expensive remote LRU cache draining after FADV_DONTNEED Johannes Weiner
2016-12-10 17:26 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-12-12 9:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-12-12 9:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-12-12 15:55 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2016-12-12 15:55 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-12-13 12:32 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-12-13 12:32 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-12-14 21:00 ` [PATCH v2] " Johannes Weiner
2016-12-14 21:00 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-12-15 4:09 ` Hillf Danton
2016-12-15 4:09 ` Hillf Danton
2016-12-12 9:51 ` [PATCH] " Mel Gorman
2016-12-12 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
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=20161212155552.GA7148@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--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 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.