public inbox for linux-mm@kvack.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: yangge1116@126.com
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	21cnbao@gmail.com, david@redhat.com,
	baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, aisheng.dong@nxp.com,
	liuzixing@hygon.cn, yangge <yangge1116@126.com>
Subject: [PATCH V2] mm/cma: using per-CMA locks to improve concurrent allocation performance
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 09:56:06 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1739152566-744-1-git-send-email-yangge1116@126.com> (raw)

From: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>

For different CMAs, concurrent allocation of CMA memory ideally should not
require synchronization using locks. Currently, a global cma_mutex lock is
employed to synchronize all CMA allocations, which can impact the
performance of concurrent allocations across different CMAs.

To test the performance impact, follow these steps:
1. Boot the kernel with the command line argument hugetlb_cma=30G to
   allocate a 30GB CMA area specifically for huge page allocations. (note:
   on my machine, which has 3 nodes, each node is initialized with 10G of
   CMA)
2. Use the dd command with parameters if=/dev/zero of=/dev/shm/file bs=1G
   count=30 to fully utilize the CMA area by writing zeroes to a file in
   /dev/shm.
3. Open three terminals and execute the following commands simultaneously:
   (Note: Each of these commands attempts to allocate 10GB [2621440 * 4KB
   pages] of CMA memory.)
   On Terminal 1: time echo 2621440 > /sys/kernel/debug/cma/hugetlb1/alloc
   On Terminal 2: time echo 2621440 > /sys/kernel/debug/cma/hugetlb2/alloc
   On Terminal 3: time echo 2621440 > /sys/kernel/debug/cma/hugetlb3/alloc

We attempt to allocate pages through the CMA debug interface and use the
time command to measure the duration of each allocation.
Performance comparison:
             Without this patch      With this patch
Terminal1        ~7s                     ~7s
Terminal2       ~14s                     ~8s
Terminal3       ~21s                     ~7s

To slove problem above, we could use per-CMA locks to improve concurrent
allocation performance. This would allow each CMA to be managed
independently, reducing the need for a global lock and thus improving
scalability and performance.

Signed-off-by: yangge <yangge1116@126.com>
---

V2:
- update code and message suggested by Barry. 

 mm/cma.c | 7 ++++---
 mm/cma.h | 1 +
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
index 34a4df2..a0d4d2f 100644
--- a/mm/cma.c
+++ b/mm/cma.c
@@ -34,7 +34,6 @@
 
 struct cma cma_areas[MAX_CMA_AREAS];
 unsigned int cma_area_count;
-static DEFINE_MUTEX(cma_mutex);
 
 static int __init __cma_declare_contiguous_nid(phys_addr_t base,
 			phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t limit,
@@ -175,6 +174,8 @@ static void __init cma_activate_area(struct cma *cma)
 
 	spin_lock_init(&cma->lock);
 
+	mutex_init(&cma->alloc_mutex);
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_CMA_DEBUGFS
 	INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&cma->mem_head);
 	spin_lock_init(&cma->mem_head_lock);
@@ -813,9 +814,9 @@ static int cma_range_alloc(struct cma *cma, struct cma_memrange *cmr,
 		spin_unlock_irq(&cma->lock);
 
 		pfn = cmr->base_pfn + (bitmap_no << cma->order_per_bit);
-		mutex_lock(&cma_mutex);
+		mutex_lock(&cma->alloc_mutex);
 		ret = alloc_contig_range(pfn, pfn + count, MIGRATE_CMA, gfp);
-		mutex_unlock(&cma_mutex);
+		mutex_unlock(&cma->alloc_mutex);
 		if (ret == 0) {
 			page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
 			break;
diff --git a/mm/cma.h b/mm/cma.h
index df7fc62..41a3ab0 100644
--- a/mm/cma.h
+++ b/mm/cma.h
@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ struct cma {
 	unsigned long	available_count;
 	unsigned int order_per_bit; /* Order of pages represented by one bit */
 	spinlock_t	lock;
+	struct mutex alloc_mutex;
 #ifdef CONFIG_CMA_DEBUGFS
 	struct hlist_head mem_head;
 	spinlock_t mem_head_lock;
-- 
2.7.4



             reply	other threads:[~2025-02-10  1:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-10  1:56 yangge1116 [this message]
2025-02-10  3:44 ` [PATCH V2] mm/cma: using per-CMA locks to improve concurrent allocation performance Barry Song
2025-02-10  8:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-02-10  8:56   ` Ge Yang
2025-02-10  9:15 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-03-18  3:43 ` Andrew Morton
2025-03-18  7:21   ` Ge Yang
2025-03-18 13:02   ` David Hildenbrand

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=1739152566-744-1-git-send-email-yangge1116@126.com \
    --to=yangge1116@126.com \
    --cc=21cnbao@gmail.com \
    --cc=aisheng.dong@nxp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=liuzixing@hygon.cn \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox