From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling
Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 10:47:01 -0700
Message-ID: <ZE/7FZbd31qIzrOc@P9FQF9L96D>
References: <20230501165450.15352-1-surenb@google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1;
        t=1682963238;
        h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
         to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
         in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
        bh=pCOJ4TIX11zw2jBaDOP97T7hx/pG0LP03OwHceiD+AE=;
        b=DiqG+Df4D+DZsn0wO9LjwkV/mLuZ3abtM/u+Nuamt3enIlxM0dOl/zDiGUemCbI1ba6Ge7
        UFxA8r7ovThZ0bL+PW2tO2CTjinF1Mnn4ax/lyq+OVwg8tX+hPdBw7CohOYds+psfqGMqa
        jFVVfskQ2Ze12DnahYd6juPiFkLzBag=
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230501165450.15352-1-surenb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
List-ID: <cgroups.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, kent.overstreet-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org, mhocko-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org, vbabka-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org, hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, mgorman-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org, dave-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org, willy-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, liam.howlett-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, corbet-T1hC0tSOHrs@public.gmane.org, void-gq6j2QGBifHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org, peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, juri.lelli-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, ldufour-tEXmvtCZX7AybS5Ee8rs3A@public.gmane.org, catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, will-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org, tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org, mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, dave.hansen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, peterx-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, david-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, axboe-tSWWG44O7X1aa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org, mcgrof-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, masahiroy-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, nathan-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, dennis-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, muchun.song-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org, rppt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, paulmck-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, pasha.tatashin-2EmBfe737+LQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, yosryahmed-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, yuzhao-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, hughd-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, andreyknvl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org

On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 09:54:10AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Performance overhead:
> To evaluate performance we implemented an in-kernel test executing
> multiple get_free_page/free_page and kmalloc/kfree calls with allocation
> sizes growing from 8 to 240 bytes with CPU frequency set to max and CPU
> affinity set to a specific CPU to minimize the noise. Below is performance
> comparison between the baseline kernel, profiling when enabled, profiling
> when disabled (nomem_profiling=y) and (for comparison purposes) baseline
> with CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM enabled and allocations using __GFP_ACCOUNT:
> 
> 			kmalloc			pgalloc
> Baseline (6.3-rc7)	9.200s			31.050s
> profiling disabled	9.800 (+6.52%)		32.600 (+4.99%)
> profiling enabled	12.500 (+35.87%)	39.010 (+25.60%)
> memcg_kmem enabled	41.400 (+350.00%)	70.600 (+127.38%)

Hm, this makes me think we have a regression with memcg_kmem in one of
the recent releases. When I measured it a couple of years ago, the overhead
was definitely within 100%.

Do you understand what makes the your profiling drastically faster than kmem?

Thanks!