linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page_fault1 and parallel free
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 09:30:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180322013049.GA4056@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dfd4b33-6eff-160e-52fd-994d9bcbffed@oracle.com>

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:44:25PM -0400, Daniel Jordan wrote:
> On 03/20/2018 04:54 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> ...snip...
> > reduced zone->lock contention on free path from 35% to 1.1%. Also, it
> > shows good result on parallel free(*) workload by reducing zone->lock
> > contention from 90% to almost zero(lru lock increased from almost 0 to
> > 90% though).
> 
> Hi Aaron, I'm looking through your series now.  Just wanted to mention that I'm seeing the same interaction between zone->lock and lru_lock in my own testing.  IOW, it's not enough to fix just one or the other: both need attention to get good performance on a big system, at least in this microbenchmark we've both been using.

Agree.

> 
> There's anti-scaling at high core counts where overall system page faults per second actually decrease with more CPUs added to the test.  This happens when either zone->lock or lru_lock contention are completely removed, but the anti-scaling goes away when both locks are fixed.
> 
> Anyway, I'll post some actual data on this stuff soon.

Looking forward to that, thanks.

In the meantime, I'll also try your lru_lock optimization work on top of
this patchset to see if the lock contention shifts back to zone->lock.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-22  1:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-20  8:54 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page_fault1 and parallel free Aaron Lu
2018-03-20  8:54 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] mm/page_alloc: use helper functions to add/remove a page to/from buddy Aaron Lu
2018-03-20 11:35   ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-20 13:50     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-20  8:54 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] mm/__free_one_page: skip merge for order-0 page unless compaction failed Aaron Lu
2018-03-20 11:45   ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-20 14:11     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-21  7:53       ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-22 17:15       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-03-22 18:39         ` Daniel Jordan
2018-03-22 18:50           ` Matthew Wilcox
     [not found]   ` <CAF7GXvovKsabDw88icK5c5xBqg6g0TomQdspfi4ikjtbg=XzGQ@mail.gmail.com>
2018-03-21  1:59     ` Aaron Lu
     [not found]       ` <CAF7GXvrQG0+iPu8h13coo2QW7WxNhjHA1JAaOYoEBBB9-obRSQ@mail.gmail.com>
2018-03-21  4:53         ` Aaron Lu
     [not found]           ` <CAF7GXvpzZassTEebX7nS0u_xynns=mxEF28rPBhXX9Yp4xQ3hw@mail.gmail.com>
2018-03-21  7:42             ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-20  8:54 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] mm/rmqueue_bulk: alloc without touching individual page structure Aaron Lu
     [not found]   ` <CAF7GXvpzgc0vsJemUYQPhPFte8b8a4nBFo=iwZBTdM1Y2eoHYw@mail.gmail.com>
2018-03-21  1:52     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-21 12:55   ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-03-21 15:01     ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-29 19:16       ` Daniel Jordan
2018-03-20  8:54 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: reduce overhead of cluster operation on free path Aaron Lu
2018-03-21 17:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page_fault1 and parallel free Daniel Jordan
2018-03-22  1:30   ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-03-22 11:20     ` Daniel Jordan
2018-03-29 19:19 ` Daniel Jordan
2018-03-30  1:42   ` Aaron Lu
2018-03-30 14:27     ` Daniel Jordan

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=20180322013049.GA4056@intel.com \
    --to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --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).