All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Nikhil Dhama <nikhil.dhama@amd.com>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,  <bharata@amd.com>,
	<raghavendra.kodsarathimmappa@amd.com>,  <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>,
	<lkp@intel.com>,  Huang Ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>,
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>,  <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: pcp: increase pcp->free_count threshold to trigger free_high
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:16:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mscn8msp.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250407105219.55351-1-nikhil.dhama@amd.com> (Nikhil Dhama's message of "Mon, 7 Apr 2025 16:22:19 +0530")

Hi, Nikhil,

Sorry for late reply.

Nikhil Dhama <nikhil.dhama@amd.com> writes:

> In old pcp design, pcp->free_factor gets incremented in nr_pcp_free()
> which is invoked by free_pcppages_bulk(). So, it used to increase
> free_factor by 1 only when we try to reduce the size of pcp list or
> flush for high order, and free_high used to trigger only 
> for order > 0 and order < costly_order and pcp->free_factor > 0.
>
> For iperf3 I noticed that with older design in kernel v6.6, pcp list was
> drained mostly when pcp->count > high (more often when count goes above
> 530). and most of the time pcp->free_factor was 0, triggering very few
> high order flushes.
>
> But this is changed in the current design, introduced in commit 6ccdcb6d3a74 
> ("mm, pcp: reduce detecting time of consecutive high order page freeing"), 
> where pcp->free_factor is changed to pcp->free_count to keep track of the 
> number of pages freed contiguously. In this design, pcp->free_count is 
> incremented on every deallocation, irrespective of whether pcp list was 
> reduced or not. And logic to trigger free_high is if pcp->free_count goes 
> above batch (which is 63) and there are two contiguous page free without 
> any allocation.

The design changes because pcp->high can become much higher than that
before it.  This makes it much harder to trigger free_high, which causes
some performance regressions too.

> With this design, for iperf3, pcp list is getting flushed more frequently 
> because free_high heuristics is triggered more often now. I observed that 
> high order pcp list is drained as soon as both count and free_count goes 
> above 63.
>
> Due to this more aggressive high order flushing, applications
> doing contiguous high order allocation will require to go to global list
> more frequently.
>
> On a 2-node AMD machine with 384 vCPUs on each node,
> connected via Mellonox connectX-7, I am seeing a ~30% performance
> reduction if we scale number of iperf3 client/server pairs from 32 to 64.
>
> Though this new design reduced the time to detect high order flushes,
> but for application which are allocating high order pages more
> frequently it may be flushing the high order list pre-maturely.
> This motivates towards tuning on how late or early we should flush
> high order lists. 
>
> So, in this patch, we increased the pcp->free_count threshold to 
> trigger free_high from "batch" to "batch + pcp->high_min / 2". 
> This new threshold keeps high order pages in pcp list for a 
> longer duration which can help the application doing high order
> allocations frequently.

IIUC, we restore the original behavior with "batch + pcp->high / 2" as
in my analysis in

https://lore.kernel.org/all/875xjmuiup.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA/

If you think my analysis is correct, can you add that in patch
description too?  This makes it easier for people to know why the code
looks this way.

> With this patch performace to Iperf3 is restored and 
> score for other benchmarks on the same machine are as follows:
>
> 		      iperf3    lmbench3        netperf         kbuild
>                                (AF_UNIX)   (SCTP_STREAM_MANY)
>                      -------   ---------   -----------------    ------
> v6.6  vanilla (base)    100          100              100          100
> v6.12 vanilla            69          113             98.5         98.8
> v6.12 + this patch      100        110.3            100.2         99.3
>
>
> netperf-tcp:
>
>                                   6.12                      6.12
>                                vanilla    	      this_patch
> Hmean     64         732.14 (   0.00%)         730.45 (  -0.23%)
> Hmean     128       1417.46 (   0.00%)        1419.44 (   0.14%)
> Hmean     256       2679.67 (   0.00%)        2676.45 (  -0.12%)
> Hmean     1024      8328.52 (   0.00%)        8339.34 (   0.13%)
> Hmean     2048     12716.98 (   0.00%)       12743.68 (   0.21%)
> Hmean     3312     15787.79 (   0.00%)       15887.25 (   0.63%)
> Hmean     4096     17311.91 (   0.00%)       17332.68 (   0.12%)
> Hmean     8192     20310.73 (   0.00%)       20465.09 (   0.76%)
>
> Fixes: 6ccdcb6d3a74 ("mm, pcp: reduce detecting time of consecutive high order page freeing")
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikhil Dhama <nikhil.dhama@amd.com>
> Suggested-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Huang Ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
>
> ---
>  v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250107091724.35287-1-nikhil.dhama@amd.com/
>  v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250325171915.14384-1-nikhil.dhama@amd.com/
>
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index b6958333054d..569dcf1f731f 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -2617,7 +2617,7 @@ static void free_unref_page_commit(struct zone *zone, struct per_cpu_pages *pcp,
>  	 * stops will be drained from vmstat refresh context.
>  	 */
>  	if (order && order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) {
> -		free_high = (pcp->free_count >= batch &&
> +		free_high = (pcp->free_count >= (batch + pcp->high_min / 2) &&
>  			     (pcp->flags & PCPF_PREV_FREE_HIGH_ORDER) &&
>  			     (!(pcp->flags & PCPF_FREE_HIGH_BATCH) ||
>  			      pcp->count >= READ_ONCE(batch)));

---
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-11  2:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-07 10:52 [PATCH v3] mm: pcp: increase pcp->free_count threshold to trigger free_high Nikhil Dhama
2025-04-11  2:16 ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2025-04-11  6:02   ` Raghavendra K T
2025-04-11  6:15     ` Huang, Ying
2025-04-26  2:11       ` Andrew Morton
2025-04-28  5:00         ` Nikhil Dhama
2025-05-11  4:30           ` Andrew Morton
2025-05-12  6:50             ` Nikhil Dhama

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=87mscn8msp.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA \
    --to=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bharata@amd.com \
    --cc=huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=nikhil.dhama@amd.com \
    --cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=raghavendra.kodsarathimmappa@amd.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.