From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/compaction: speed up pageblock_pfn_to_page() when zone is contiguous
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 11:46:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5677D888.40704@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450678432-16593-2-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
On 12/21/2015 07:13 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> There is a performance drop report due to hugepage allocation and in there
> half of cpu time are spent on pageblock_pfn_to_page() in compaction [1].
> In that workload, compaction is triggered to make hugepage but most of
> pageblocks are un-available for compaction due to pageblock type and
> skip bit so compaction usually fails. Most costly operations in this case
> is to find valid pageblock while scanning whole zone range. To check
> if pageblock is valid to compact, valid pfn within pageblock is required
> and we can obtain it by calling pageblock_pfn_to_page(). This function
> checks whether pageblock is in a single zone and return valid pfn
> if possible. Problem is that we need to check it every time before
> scanning pageblock even if we re-visit it and this turns out to
> be very expensive in this workload.
>
> Although we have no way to skip this pageblock check in the system
> where hole exists at arbitrary position, we can use cached value for
> zone continuity and just do pfn_to_page() in the system where hole doesn't
> exist. This optimization considerably speeds up in above workload.
>
> Before vs After
> Max: 1096 MB/s vs 1325 MB/s
> Min: 635 MB/s 1015 MB/s
> Avg: 899 MB/s 1194 MB/s
>
> Avg is improved by roughly 30% [2].
>
> [1]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg97378.html
> [2]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/9/23
>
> v2
> o checking zone continuity after initialization
> o handle memory-hotplug case
>
> Reported and Tested-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
[...]
> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> @@ -505,6 +505,9 @@ int __ref __add_pages(int nid, struct zone *zone, unsigned long phys_start_pfn,
> unsigned long i;
> int err = 0;
> int start_sec, end_sec;
> +
> + clear_zone_contiguous(zone);
> +
> /* during initialize mem_map, align hot-added range to section */
> start_sec = pfn_to_section_nr(phys_start_pfn);
> end_sec = pfn_to_section_nr(phys_start_pfn + nr_pages - 1);
> @@ -523,6 +526,8 @@ int __ref __add_pages(int nid, struct zone *zone, unsigned long phys_start_pfn,
> }
> vmemmap_populate_print_last();
>
> + set_zone_contiguous(zone);
> +
> return err;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__add_pages);
> @@ -770,6 +775,8 @@ int __remove_pages(struct zone *zone, unsigned long phys_start_pfn,
> resource_size_t start, size;
> int ret = 0;
>
> + clear_zone_contiguous(zone);
> +
> /*
> * We can only remove entire sections
> */
> @@ -796,6 +803,9 @@ int __remove_pages(struct zone *zone, unsigned long phys_start_pfn,
> if (ret)
> break;
> }
> +
> + set_zone_contiguous(zone);
> +
> return ret;
Hm I wonder how many __add_ or __remove_pages calls there might be per a
major hotplug event (e.g. whole node). IIRC there may be many subranges
that are onlined/offlined separately? Doing a full zone rescan on each
sub-operation could be quite costly, no? You should have added
mm/hotplug_memory.c people to CC to comment, as you did in the [RFC]
theoretical race... mail. Doing that now.
If the hotplug people confirm it might be an issue, I guess one solution
is to call set_zone_contiguous() lazily on-demand as you did in the v1
(but not relying on cached pfn initialization to determine whether
contiguous was already evaluated). Add another variable like
zone->contiguous_evaluated and make hotplug code just set it to false.
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__remove_pages);
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index bac8842..4f5ad2b 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1271,9 +1271,13 @@ free_range:
> pgdat_init_report_one_done();
> return 0;
> }
> +#endif /* CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT */
>
> void __init page_alloc_init_late(void)
> {
> + struct zone *zone;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT
> int nid;
>
> /* There will be num_node_state(N_MEMORY) threads */
> @@ -1287,8 +1291,87 @@ void __init page_alloc_init_late(void)
>
> /* Reinit limits that are based on free pages after the kernel is up */
> files_maxfiles_init();
> +#endif
> +
> + for_each_populated_zone(zone)
> + set_zone_contiguous(zone);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Check that the whole (or subset of) a pageblock given by the interval of
> + * [start_pfn, end_pfn) is valid and within the same zone, before scanning it
> + * with the migration of free compaction scanner. The scanners then need to
> + * use only pfn_valid_within() check for arches that allow holes within
> + * pageblocks.
> + *
> + * Return struct page pointer of start_pfn, or NULL if checks were not passed.
> + *
> + * It's possible on some configurations to have a setup like node0 node1 node0
> + * i.e. it's possible that all pages within a zones range of pages do not
> + * belong to a single zone. We assume that a border between node0 and node1
> + * can occur within a single pageblock, but not a node0 node1 node0
> + * interleaving within a single pageblock. It is therefore sufficient to check
> + * the first and last page of a pageblock and avoid checking each individual
> + * page in a pageblock.
> + */
> +struct page *__pageblock_pfn_to_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
> + unsigned long end_pfn, struct zone *zone)
> +{
> + struct page *start_page;
> + struct page *end_page;
> +
> + /* end_pfn is one past the range we are checking */
> + end_pfn--;
> +
> + if (!pfn_valid(start_pfn) || !pfn_valid(end_pfn))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + start_page = pfn_to_page(start_pfn);
> +
> + if (page_zone(start_page) != zone)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + end_page = pfn_to_page(end_pfn);
> +
> + /* This gives a shorter code than deriving page_zone(end_page) */
> + if (page_zone_id(start_page) != page_zone_id(end_page))
> + return NULL;
> +
> + return start_page;
> +}
> +
> +void set_zone_contiguous(struct zone *zone)
> +{
> + unsigned long block_start_pfn = zone->zone_start_pfn;
> + unsigned long block_end_pfn;
> + unsigned long pfn;
> +
> + block_end_pfn = ALIGN(block_start_pfn + 1, pageblock_nr_pages);
> + for (; block_start_pfn < zone_end_pfn(zone);
> + block_start_pfn = block_end_pfn,
> + block_end_pfn += pageblock_nr_pages) {
> +
> + block_end_pfn = min(block_end_pfn, zone_end_pfn(zone));
> +
> + if (!__pageblock_pfn_to_page(block_start_pfn,
> + block_end_pfn, zone))
> + return;
> +
> + /* Check validity of pfn within pageblock */
> + for (pfn = block_start_pfn; pfn < block_end_pfn; pfn++) {
> + if (!pfn_valid_within(pfn))
> + return;
> + }
Hm this is suboptimal and misleading. The result of pfn_valid_within()
doesn't affect whether we need to use __pageblock_pfn_to_page() or not,
so zone->contiguous shouldn't depend on it.
On the other hand, if we knew that pfn_valid_within() is true
everywhere, we wouldn't need to check it inside isolate_*pages_block().
So you could add another patch that adds another bool to struct zone and
test for that (with #ifdef CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE at appropriate places).
Thanks,
Vlastimil
> + }
> +
> + /* We confirm that there is no hole */
> + zone->contiguous = true;
> +}
> +
> +void clear_zone_contiguous(struct zone *zone)
> +{
> + zone->contiguous = false;
> }
> -#endif /* CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT */
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CMA
> /* Free whole pageblock and set its migration type to MIGRATE_CMA. */
>
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-21 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-21 6:13 [PATCH 1/2] mm/compaction: fix invalid free_pfn and compact_cached_free_pfn Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-21 6:13 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/compaction: speed up pageblock_pfn_to_page() when zone is contiguous Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-21 10:46 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2015-12-21 12:18 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-21 12:38 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-22 22:17 ` David Rientjes
2015-12-23 6:14 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-12-23 6:57 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-01-04 12:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-01-08 2:52 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-01-19 8:29 ` zhong jiang
2015-12-22 22:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm/compaction: fix invalid free_pfn and compact_cached_free_pfn David Rientjes
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-12-14 5:02 Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-14 5:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/compaction: speed up pageblock_pfn_to_page() when zone is contiguous Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-14 10:29 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-12-14 15:25 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-12-15 1:06 ` Aaron Lu
2015-12-15 8:24 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=5677D888.40704@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=js1304@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=toshi.kani@hpe.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).