linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Stewart Smith <stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV on POWER8
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 12:41:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53BBCAC7.90904@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404795988-9892-1-git-send-email-stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


On 08.07.14 07:06, Stewart Smith wrote:
> The POWER8 processor has a Micro Partition Prefetch Engine, which is
> a fancy way of saying "has way to store and load contents of L2 or
> L2+MRU way of L3 cache". We initiate the storing of the log (list of
> addresses) using the logmpp instruction and start restore by writing
> to a SPR.
>
> The logmpp instruction takes parameters in a single 64bit register:
> - starting address of the table to store log of L2/L2+L3 cache contents
>    - 32kb for L2
>    - 128kb for L2+L3
>    - Aligned relative to maximum size of the table (32kb or 128kb)
> - Log control (no-op, L2 only, L2 and L3, abort logout)
>
> We should abort any ongoing logging before initiating one.
>
> To initiate restore, we write to the MPPR SPR. The format of what to write
> to the SPR is similar to the logmpp instruction parameter:
> - starting address of the table to read from (same alignment requirements)
> - table size (no data, until end of table)
> - prefetch rate (from fastest possible to slower. about every 8, 16, 24 or
>    32 cycles)
>
> The idea behind loading and storing the contents of L2/L3 cache is to
> reduce memory latency in a system that is frequently swapping vcores on
> a physical CPU.
>
> The best case scenario for doing this is when some vcores are doing very
> cache heavy workloads. The worst case is when they have about 0 cache hits,
> so we just generate needless memory operations.
>
> This implementation just does L2 store/load. In my benchmarks this proves
> to be useful.
>
> Benchmark 1:
>   - 16 core POWER8
>   - 3x Ubuntu 14.04LTS guests (LE) with 8 VCPUs each
>   - No split core/SMT
>   - two guests running sysbench memory test.
>     sysbench --test=memory --num-threads=8 run
>   - one guest running apache bench (of default HTML page)
>     ab -n 490000 -c 400 http://localhost/
>
> This benchmark aims to measure performance of real world application (apache)
> where other guests are cache hot with their own workloads. The sysbench memory
> benchmark does pointer sized writes to a (small) memory buffer in a loop.
>
> In this benchmark with this patch I can see an improvement both in requests
> per second (~5%) and in mean and median response times (again, about 5%).
> The spread of minimum and maximum response times were largely unchanged.
>
> benchmark 2:
>   - Same VM config as benchmark 1
>   - all three guests running sysbench memory benchmark
>
> This benchmark aims to see if there is a positive or negative affect to this
> cache heavy benchmark. Although due to the nature of the benchmark (stores) we
> may not see a difference in performance, but rather hopefully an improvement
> in consistency of performance (when vcore switched in, don't have to wait
> many times for cachelines to be pulled in)
>
> The results of this benchmark are improvements in consistency of performance
> rather than performance itself. With this patch, the few outliers in duration
> go away and we get more consistent performance in each guest.
>
> benchmark 3:
>   - same 3 guests and CPU configuration as benchmark 1 and 2.
>   - two idle guests
>   - 1 guest running STREAM benchmark
>
> This scenario also saw performance improvement with this patch. On Copy and
> Scale workloads from STREAM, I got 5-6% improvement with this patch. For
> Add and triad, it was around 10% (or more).
>
> benchmark 4:
>   - same 3 guests as previous benchmarks
>   - two guests running sysbench --memory, distinctly different cache heavy
>     workload
>   - one guest running STREAM benchmark.
>
> Similar improvements to benchmark 3.
>
> benchmark 5:
>   - 1 guest, 8 VCPUs, Ubuntu 14.04
>   - Host configured with split core (SMT8, subcores-per-core=4)
>   - STREAM benchmark
>
> In this benchmark, we see a 10-20% performance improvement across the board
> of STREAM benchmark results with this patch.
>
> Based on preliminary investigation and microbenchmarks
> by Prerna Saxena <prerna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Stewart Smith <stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> --
> changes since v1:
> - s/mppe/mpp_buffer/
> - add MPP_BUFFER_ORDER define.
> ---
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h   |    1 +
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h |   10 ++++++
>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h        |    1 +
>   arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c          |   54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> index 1eaea2d..83ed249 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> @@ -305,6 +305,7 @@ struct kvmppc_vcore {
>   	u32 arch_compat;
>   	ulong pcr;
>   	ulong dpdes;		/* doorbell state (POWER8) */
> +	unsigned long mpp_buffer; /* Micro Partition Prefetch buffer */
>   };
>   
>   #define VCORE_ENTRY_COUNT(vc)	((vc)->entry_exit_count & 0xff)
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> index 3132bb9..6201440 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h
> @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@
>   #define PPC_INST_ISEL			0x7c00001e
>   #define PPC_INST_ISEL_MASK		0xfc00003e
>   #define PPC_INST_LDARX			0x7c0000a8
> +#define PPC_INST_LOGMPP			0x7c0007e4
>   #define PPC_INST_LSWI			0x7c0004aa
>   #define PPC_INST_LSWX			0x7c00042a
>   #define PPC_INST_LWARX			0x7c000028
> @@ -275,6 +276,13 @@
>   #define __PPC_EH(eh)	0
>   #endif
>   
> +/* POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch parameters */
> +#define PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK 0xffffffffc000
> +#define PPC_MPPE_WHOLE_TABLE (0x2ULL << 60)
> +#define PPC_MPPE_LOG_L2 (0x02ULL << 54)
> +#define PPC_MPPE_LOG_L2L3 (0x01ULL << 54)
> +#define PPC_MPPE_LOG_ABORT (0x03ULL << 54)
> +
>   /* Deal with instructions that older assemblers aren't aware of */
>   #define	PPC_DCBAL(a, b)		stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_DCBAL | \
>   					__PPC_RA(a) | __PPC_RB(b))
> @@ -283,6 +291,8 @@
>   #define PPC_LDARX(t, a, b, eh)	stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LDARX | \
>   					___PPC_RT(t) | ___PPC_RA(a) | \
>   					___PPC_RB(b) | __PPC_EH(eh))
> +#define PPC_LOGMPP(b)		stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LOGMPP | \
> +					__PPC_RB(b))
>   #define PPC_LWARX(t, a, b, eh)	stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_LWARX | \
>   					___PPC_RT(t) | ___PPC_RA(a) | \
>   					___PPC_RB(b) | __PPC_EH(eh))
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> index e5d2e0b..5164beb 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
> @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@
>   #define   CTRL_TE	0x00c00000	/* thread enable */
>   #define   CTRL_RUNLATCH	0x1
>   #define SPRN_DAWR	0xB4
> +#define SPRN_MPPR	0xB8	/* Micro Partition Prefetch Register */
>   #define SPRN_CIABR	0xBB
>   #define   CIABR_PRIV		0x3
>   #define   CIABR_PRIV_USER	1
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> index 8227dba..41dab67 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,13 @@
>   /* Used as a "null" value for timebase values */
>   #define TB_NIL	(~(u64)0)
>   
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES)
> +#define MPP_BUFFER_ORDER	0
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES)
> +#define MPP_BUFFER_ORDER	4
> +#endif
> +
> +
>   static void kvmppc_end_cede(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>   static int kvmppc_hv_setup_htab_rma(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>   
> @@ -1528,6 +1535,7 @@ static void kvmppc_run_core(struct kvmppc_vcore *vc)
>   	int i, need_vpa_update;
>   	int srcu_idx;
>   	struct kvm_vcpu *vcpus_to_update[threads_per_core];
> +	phys_addr_t phy_addr, tmp;

Please put the variable declarations into the if () branch so that the 
compiler can catch potential leaks :)

>   
>   	/* don't start if any threads have a signal pending */
>   	need_vpa_update = 0;
> @@ -1590,9 +1598,48 @@ static void kvmppc_run_core(struct kvmppc_vcore *vc)
>   
>   	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&vc->kvm->srcu);
>   
> +	/* If we have a saved list of L2/L3, restore it */
> +	if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_207S) && vc->mpp_buffer) {
> +		phy_addr = virt_to_phys((void *)vc->mpp_buffer);
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES)
> +		phy_addr = (phy_addr + 8*4096) & ~(8*4096);

get_free_pages() is automatically aligned to the order, no?

> +#endif
> +		tmp = phy_addr & PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK;
> +		tmp = tmp | PPC_MPPE_WHOLE_TABLE;
> +
> +		/* For sanity, abort any 'save' requests in progress */
> +		asm volatile(PPC_LOGMPP(R1) : : "r" (tmp));
> +
> +		/* Inititate a cache-load request */
> +		mtspr(SPRN_MPPR, tmp);
> +	}

In fact, this whole block up here could be a function, no?

> +
> +	/* Allocate memory before switching out of guest so we don't
> +	   trash L2/L3 with memory allocation stuff */
> +	if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_207S) && !vc->mpp_buffer) {
> +		vc->mpp_buffer = __get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO,
> +						  MPP_BUFFER_ORDER);

get_order(64 * 1024)?

Also, why allocate it here and not on vcore creation?

> +	}
> +
>   	__kvmppc_vcore_entry();
>   
>   	spin_lock(&vc->lock);
> +
> +	if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_207S) && vc->mpp_buffer) {
> +		phy_addr = (phys_addr_t)virt_to_phys((void *)vc->mpp_buffer);
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES)
> +		phy_addr = (phy_addr + 8*4096) & ~(8*4096);
> +#endif
> +		tmp = PPC_MPPE_ADDRESS_MASK & phy_addr;
> +		tmp = tmp | PPC_MPPE_LOG_L2;
> +
> +		/* Abort any existing 'fetch' operations for this core */
> +		mtspr(SPRN_MPPR, tmp&0x0fffffffffffffff);

pretty magical, no?

> +
> +		/* Finally, issue logmpp to save cache contents for L2 */
> +		asm volatile(PPC_LOGMPP(R1) : : "r" (tmp));
> +	}

This too should be a separate function.


Alex

> +
>   	/* disable sending of IPIs on virtual external irqs */
>   	list_for_each_entry(vcpu, &vc->runnable_threads, arch.run_list)
>   		vcpu->cpu = -1;
> @@ -2329,8 +2376,13 @@ static void kvmppc_free_vcores(struct kvm *kvm)
>   {
>   	long int i;
>   
> -	for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCORES; ++i)
> +	for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCORES; ++i) {
> +		if (kvm->arch.vcores[i] && kvm->arch.vcores[i]->mpp_buffer) {
> +			free_pages(kvm->arch.vcores[i]->mpp_buffer,
> +				   MPP_BUFFER_ORDER);
> +		}
>   		kfree(kvm->arch.vcores[i]);
> +	}
>   	kvm->arch.online_vcores = 0;
>   }
>   

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-08 10:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-04  1:23 [PATCH] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV on POWER8 Stewart Smith
2014-07-08  5:06 ` [PATCH v2] " Stewart Smith
2014-07-08 10:41   ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2014-07-08 22:59     ` Stewart Smith
2014-07-10 11:05       ` Alexander Graf
2014-07-10 13:07         ` Mel Gorman
2014-07-10 13:17           ` Alexander Graf
2014-07-10 13:30             ` Mel Gorman
2014-07-10 13:30               ` Alexander Graf
2014-07-17  3:19   ` [PATCH v3] " Stewart Smith
2014-07-17  7:55     ` Alexander Graf
2014-07-18  4:10       ` Stewart Smith
2014-07-28 12:30         ` Alexander Graf
2014-07-17 23:52     ` Paul Mackerras
2014-07-18  4:10       ` Stewart Smith
2014-07-18  4:18     ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV Stewart Smith
2014-07-18  4:18       ` [PATCH v4 1/2] Split out struct kvmppc_vcore creation to separate function Stewart Smith
2014-07-18  7:47         ` Paul Mackerras
2014-07-18  4:18       ` [PATCH v4 2/2] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV on POWER8 Stewart Smith
2014-07-18  7:48         ` Paul Mackerras
2014-07-28 12:34       ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Use the POWER8 Micro Partition Prefetch Engine in KVM HV Alexander Graf

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=53BBCAC7.90904@suse.de \
    --to=agraf@suse.de \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=stewart@linux.vnet.ibm.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).