From: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>
To: Don Porter <porterde@cs.utexas.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Optimize zone allocator synchronization
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:08:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47303D07.4050404@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071104195212.GF16354@olive-green.cs.utexas.edu>
Don Porter wrote:
> From: Donald E. Porter <porterde@cs.utexas.edu>
>
> In the bulk page allocation/free routines in mm/page_alloc.c, the zone
> lock is held across all iterations. For certain parallel workloads, I
> have found that releasing and reacquiring the lock for each iteration
> yields better performance, especially at higher CPU counts. For
> instance, kernel compilation is sped up by 5% on an 8 CPU test
> machine. In most cases, there is no significant effect on performance
> (although the effect tends to be slightly positive). This seems quite
> reasonable for the very small scope of the change.
>
> My intuition is that this patch prevents smaller requests from waiting
> on larger ones. While grabbing and releasing the lock within the loop
> adds a few instructions, it can lower the latency for a particular
> thread's allocation which is often on the thread's critical path.
> Lowering the average latency for allocation can increase system throughput.
>
> More detailed information, including data from the tests I ran to
> validate this change are available at
> http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~porterde/kernel-patch.html .
>
> Thanks in advance for your consideration and feedback.
That's an interesting insight. My intuition is that Nick Piggin's
recently-posted ticket spinlocks patches[1] will reduce the need for this patch,
though it may be useful to have both. Can you benchmark again with only ticket
spinlocks, and with ticket spinlocks + this patch? You'll probably want to use
2.6.24-rc1 as your baseline, due to the x86 architecture merge.
-- Chris
[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/11/1/123
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-06 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-04 19:52 [RFC/PATCH] Optimize zone allocator synchronization Don Porter
2007-11-06 10:08 ` Chris Snook [this message]
2007-11-07 6:19 ` Andrew Morton
2007-11-07 5:31 ` Nick Piggin
2007-11-18 5:36 ` Don Porter
2008-01-29 16:31 ` Don Porter
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=47303D07.4050404@redhat.com \
--to=csnook@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=porterde@cs.utexas.edu \
/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