From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
andi.kleen@intel.com, tim.c.chen@intel.com,
dave.hansen@intel.com, ying.huang@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: adjust vm_committed_as_batch according to vm overcommit policy
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 15:38:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200518153824.e4e57a651c6ca69fb8776dbc@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1589611660-89854-4-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com>
On Sat, 16 May 2020 14:47:40 +0800 Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com> wrote:
> When checking a performance change for will-it-scale scalability
> mmap test [1], we found very high lock contention for spinlock of
> percpu counter 'vm_committed_as':
>
> 94.14% 0.35% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> 48.21% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave;percpu_counter_add_batch;__vm_enough_memory;mmap_region;do_mmap;
> 45.91% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave;percpu_counter_add_batch;__do_munmap;
>
> Actually this heavy lock contention is not always necessary. The
> 'vm_committed_as' needs to be very precise when the strict
> OVERCOMMIT_NEVER policy is set, which requires a rather small batch
> number for the percpu counter.
>
> So keep 'batch' number unchanged for strict OVERCOMMIT_NEVER policy,
> and lift it to 64X for OVERCOMMIT_ALWAYS and OVERCOMMIT_GUESS policies.
> Also add a sysctl handler to adjust it when the policy is reconfigured.
>
> Benchmark with the same testcase in [1] shows 53% improvement on a
> 8C/16T desktop, and 2097%(20X) on a 4S/72C/144T server. We tested
> with test platforms in 0day (server, desktop and laptop), and 80%+
> platforms shows improvements with that test. And whether it shows
> improvements depends on if the test mmap size is bigger than the
> batch number computed.
>
> And if the lift is 16X, 1/3 of the platforms will show improvements,
> though it should help the mmap/unmap usage generally, as Michal Hocko
> mentioned:
> "
> I believe that there are non-synthetic worklaods which would benefit
> from a larger batch. E.g. large in memory databases which do large
> mmaps during startups from multiple threads.
> "
>
This needed some adjustments to overcommit_policy_handler() after
linux-next's 32927393dc1c ("sysctl: pass kernel pointers to
->proc_handler"). Relevant parts are below.
--- a/include/linux/mm.h~mm-adjust-vm_committed_as_batch-according-to-vm-overcommit-policy
+++ a/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -205,6 +205,8 @@ int overcommit_ratio_handler(struct ctl_
loff_t *);
int overcommit_kbytes_handler(struct ctl_table *, int, void *, size_t *,
loff_t *);
+int overcommit_policy_handler(struct ctl_table *, int, void *, size_t *,
+ loff_t *);
#define nth_page(page,n) pfn_to_page(page_to_pfn((page)) + (n))
--- a/mm/util.c~mm-adjust-vm_committed_as_batch-according-to-vm-overcommit-policy
+++ a/mm/util.c
@@ -746,6 +746,18 @@ int overcommit_ratio_handler(struct ctl_
return ret;
}
+int overcommit_policy_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, void *buffer,
+ size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = proc_dointvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
+ if (ret == 0 && write)
+ mm_compute_batch();
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
int overcommit_kbytes_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, void *buffer,
size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos)
{
_
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-18 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-16 6:47 [PATCH v3 0/3] make vm_committed_as_batch aware of vm overcommit policy Feng Tang
2020-05-16 6:47 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] proc/meminfo: avoid open coded reading of vm_committed_as Feng Tang
2020-05-16 6:47 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/util.c: make vm_memory_committed() more accurate Feng Tang
2020-05-16 6:47 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: adjust vm_committed_as_batch according to vm overcommit policy Feng Tang
2020-05-18 22:38 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
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=20200518153824.e4e57a651c6ca69fb8776dbc@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi.kleen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).