From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:37:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180223013714.GA4338@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180215120608.g5wj2qb2thkkzu5e@techsingularity.net>
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:06:08PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 03:21:44PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > When freeing a batch of pages from Per-CPU-Pages(PCP) back to buddy,
> > the zone->lock is held and then pages are chosen from PCP's migratetype
> > list. While there is actually no need to do this 'choose part' under
> > lock since it's PCP pages, the only CPU that can touch them is us and
> > irq is also disabled.
> >
> > Moving this part outside could reduce lock held time and improve
> > performance. Test with will-it-scale/page_fault1 full load:
> >
> > kernel Broadwell(2S) Skylake(2S) Broadwell(4S) Skylake(4S)
> > v4.15-rc4 9037332 8000124 13642741 15728686
> > this patch 9608786 +6.3% 8368915 +4.6% 14042169 +2.9% 17433559 +10.8%
> >
> > What the test does is: starts $nr_cpu processes and each will repeatedly
> > do the following for 5 minutes:
> > 1 mmap 128M anonymouse space;
> > 2 write access to that space;
> > 3 munmap.
> > The score is the aggregated iteration.
> >
> > https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/blob/master/tests/page_fault1.c
> >
> > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
>
> It looks like this series may have gotten lost because it was embedded
> within an existing thread or else it was the proximity to the merge
> window. I suggest a rebase, retest and resubmit unless there was some
> major objection that I missed. Patch 1 is fine by me at least. I never
> explicitly acked patch 2 but I've no major objection to it, just am a tad
> uncomfortable with prefetch magic sauce in general.
Thanks for the suggestion.
I just got back from vacation and will send out once I collected all the
required date.
--
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: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:37:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180223013714.GA4338@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180215120608.g5wj2qb2thkkzu5e@techsingularity.net>
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:06:08PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 03:21:44PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > When freeing a batch of pages from Per-CPU-Pages(PCP) back to buddy,
> > the zone->lock is held and then pages are chosen from PCP's migratetype
> > list. While there is actually no need to do this 'choose part' under
> > lock since it's PCP pages, the only CPU that can touch them is us and
> > irq is also disabled.
> >
> > Moving this part outside could reduce lock held time and improve
> > performance. Test with will-it-scale/page_fault1 full load:
> >
> > kernel Broadwell(2S) Skylake(2S) Broadwell(4S) Skylake(4S)
> > v4.15-rc4 9037332 8000124 13642741 15728686
> > this patch 9608786 +6.3% 8368915 +4.6% 14042169 +2.9% 17433559 +10.8%
> >
> > What the test does is: starts $nr_cpu processes and each will repeatedly
> > do the following for 5 minutes:
> > 1 mmap 128M anonymouse space;
> > 2 write access to that space;
> > 3 munmap.
> > The score is the aggregated iteration.
> >
> > https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/blob/master/tests/page_fault1.c
> >
> > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
>
> It looks like this series may have gotten lost because it was embedded
> within an existing thread or else it was the proximity to the merge
> window. I suggest a rebase, retest and resubmit unless there was some
> major objection that I missed. Patch 1 is fine by me at least. I never
> explicitly acked patch 2 but I've no major objection to it, just am a tad
> uncomfortable with prefetch magic sauce in general.
Thanks for the suggestion.
I just got back from vacation and will send out once I collected all the
required date.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-23 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-24 2:30 [PATCH 1/2] free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free Aaron Lu
2018-01-24 2:30 ` Aaron Lu
2018-01-24 2:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] free_pcppages_bulk: prefetch buddy while not holding lock Aaron Lu
2018-01-24 2:30 ` Aaron Lu
2018-01-24 16:43 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 16:43 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 16:57 ` Dave Hansen
2018-01-24 16:57 ` Dave Hansen
2018-01-24 18:19 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 18:19 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 19:23 ` Dave Hansen
2018-01-24 19:23 ` Dave Hansen
2018-01-24 21:12 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 21:12 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-25 7:25 ` [PATCH v2 " Aaron Lu
2018-01-25 7:25 ` Aaron Lu
2018-01-24 16:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free Mel Gorman
2018-01-24 16:40 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-25 7:21 ` [PATCH v2 " Aaron Lu
2018-01-25 7:21 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-15 12:06 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-15 12:06 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-23 1:37 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-02-23 1:37 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-15 12:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-02-15 12:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-02-15 14:55 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-15 14:55 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-23 1:42 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-23 1:42 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 5:30 ` RFC: eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page_fault1 on big server Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 5:30 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 5:31 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] __free_one_page: skip merge for order-0 page unless compaction is in progress Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 5:31 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 22:17 ` Dave Hansen
2018-02-05 22:17 ` Dave Hansen
2018-02-05 5:32 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] rmqueue_bulk: avoid touching page structures under zone->lock Aaron Lu
2018-02-05 5:32 ` Aaron Lu
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=20180223013714.GA4338@intel.com \
--to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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.