[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1250594162-17322-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:15:59 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Reduce searching in the page allocator fast-path
The following three patches are a revisit of the proposal to remove searching
in the page allocator fast-path by maintaining multiple free-lists in the
per-cpu structure. At the time the search was introduced, increasing the
per-cpu structures would waste a lot of memory as per-cpu structures were
statically allocated at compile-time. This is no longer the case.
These patches have been brought up before but the results as to whether
they helped or not were inconclusive and I was worried about the pcpu drain
path. While the patches in various guises have been ACKd, they were never
merged because the performance results were always shaky. I beefed up the
of the testing methodology and the results indicate either no improvements
or small gains with two exceptionally large gains. I'm marginally happier
with the free path than I was previously.
The patches are as follows. They are based on mmotm-2009-08-12.
Patch 1 adds multiple lists to struct per_cpu_pages, one per
migratetype that can be stored on the PCP lists.
Patch 2 notes that the pcpu drain path check empty lists multiple times. The
patch reduces the number of checks by maintaining a count of free
lists encountered. Lists containing pages will then free multiple
pages in batch
Patch 3 notes that the per-cpu structure is larger than it needs to be because
pcpu->high and batch are read-mostly variables shared by the
zone. The patch moves those fields to struct zone.
The patches were tested with kernbench, aim9, netperf udp/tcp, hackbench and
sysbench. The netperf tests were not bound to any CPU in particular and
were run such that the results should be 99% confidence that the reported
results are within 1% of the estimated mean. sysbench was run with a
postgres background and read-only tests. Similar to netperf, it was run
multiple times so that it's 99% confidence results are within 1%. The
patches were tested on x86, x86-64 and ppc64 as
x86: Intel Pentium D 3GHz with 8G RAM (no-brand machine)
kernbench - No significant difference, variance well within noise
aim9 - 3-6% gain on page_test and brk_test
netperf-udp - No significant differences
netperf-tcp - Small variances, very close to noise
hackbench - Small variances, very close to noise
sysbench - Small gains, very close to noise
x86-64: AMD Phenom 9950 1.3GHz with 8G RAM (no-brand machine)
kernbench - No significant difference, variance well within noise
aim9 - No significant difference
netperf-udp - No difference until buffer >= PAGE_SIZE
4096 +1.39%
8192 +6.80%
16384 +9.55%
netperf-tcp - No difference until buffer >= PAGE_SIZE
4096 +14.14%
8192 + 0.23% (not significant)
16384 -12.56%
hackbench - Small gains, very close to noise
sysbench - Small gains/losses, very close to noise
ppc64: PPC970MP 2.5GHz with 10GB RAM (it's a terrasoft powerstation)
kernbench - No significant difference, variance well within noise
aim9 - No significant difference
netperf-udp - 2-3% gain for almost all buffer sizes tested
netperf-tcp - losses on small buffers, gains on larger buffers
possibly indicates some bad caching effect. Suspect
struct zone could be laid out much better
hackbench - Small 1-2% gains
sysbench - 5-7% gain
For the most part, performance differences are marginal with some noticeable
exceptions. netperf-udp on x86-64 gained heavily as did sysbench on ppc64. I
suspect the TCP results, particularly for small buffers, point to some
cache line bouncing effect which I haven't pinned down yet.
include/linux/mmzone.h | 10 ++-
mm/page_alloc.c | 162 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
mm/vmstat.c | 4 +-
3 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists