[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121120152933.GA17996@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:29:33 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm, numa: Turn 4K pte NUMA faults into effective hugepage
ones
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hugepages is a must for most forms of NUMA/HPC. This alone
> > > questions the relevance of most of your prior numa/core testing
> > > results. I now have to strongly dispute your other conclusions
> > > as well.
> >
> > Ingo, stop doing this kind of crap.
> >
> > Let's make it clear: if the NUMA patches continue to regress
> > performance for reasonable loads (and that very much includes
> > "no THP") then they won't be merged.
> [...]
>
> No doubt numa/core should not regress with THP off or on and
> I'll fix that.
Once it was clear how Mel's workload was configured I could
reproduce it immediately myself as well and the fix was easy and
straightforward: the attached patch should do the trick.
(Lightly tested.)
Updated 32-warehouse SPECjbb test benchmarks on a 4x4 64 GB
system:
mainline: 395 k/sec
numa/core +patch: 512 k/sec [ +29.6% ]
mainline +THP: 524 k/sec
numa/core +patch +THP: 654 k/sec [ +24.8% ]
So here on my box the reported 32-warehouse SPECjbb regressions
are fixed to the best of my knowledge, and numa/core is now a
nice unconditional speedup over mainline.
CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING=y brings roughly as much of a speedup to
mainline as CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=y itself - and the
combination of the two features brings roughly a combination of
speedups: +65%, which looks pretty impressive.
This fix had no impact on the good "+THP +NUMA" results that
were reproducible with -v16 already.
Mel, David, could you give this patch too a whirl? It should
improve !THP workloads.
( The 4x JVM regression is still an open bug I think - I'll
re-check and fix that one next, no need to re-report it,
I'm on it. )
Thanks,
Ingo
----------------------------->
Subject: mm, numa: Turn 4K pte NUMA faults into effective hugepage ones
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Date: Tue Nov 20 15:48:26 CET 2012
Reduce the 4K page fault count by looking around and processing
nearby pages if possible.
To keep the logic simple and straightforward we do a couple of
simplifications:
- we only scan in the HPAGE_SIZE range of the faulting address
- we only go as far as the vma allows us
Also simplify the do_numa_page() flow while at it and fix the
previous double faulting we incurred due to not properly fixing
up freshly migrated ptes.
Suggested-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
---
mm/memory.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
Index: linux/mm/memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/memory.c
+++ linux/mm/memory.c
@@ -3455,64 +3455,94 @@ static int do_nonlinear_fault(struct mm_
return __do_fault(mm, vma, address, pmd, pgoff, flags, orig_pte);
}
-static int do_numa_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static int __do_numa_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep, pmd_t *pmd,
- unsigned int flags, pte_t entry)
+ unsigned int flags, pte_t entry, spinlock_t *ptl)
{
- struct page *page = NULL;
- int node, page_nid = -1;
- int last_cpu = -1;
- spinlock_t *ptl;
-
- ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
- spin_lock(ptl);
- if (unlikely(!pte_same(*ptep, entry)))
- goto out_unlock;
+ struct page *page;
+ int new_node;
page = vm_normal_page(vma, address, entry);
if (page) {
- get_page(page);
- page_nid = page_to_nid(page);
- last_cpu = page_last_cpu(page);
- node = mpol_misplaced(page, vma, address);
- if (node != -1 && node != page_nid)
+ int page_nid = page_to_nid(page);
+ int last_cpu = page_last_cpu(page);
+
+ new_node = mpol_misplaced(page, vma, address);
+ if (new_node != -1 && new_node != page_nid)
goto migrate;
+ task_numa_fault(page_nid, last_cpu, 1);
}
-out_pte_upgrade_unlock:
+out_pte_upgrade:
flush_cache_page(vma, address, pte_pfn(entry));
-
ptep_modify_prot_start(mm, address, ptep);
entry = pte_modify(entry, vma->vm_page_prot);
+ if (pte_dirty(entry))
+ entry = pte_mkwrite(entry);
ptep_modify_prot_commit(mm, address, ptep, entry);
-
/* No TLB flush needed because we upgraded the PTE */
-
update_mmu_cache(vma, address, ptep);
-
-out_unlock:
- pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl);
-
- if (page) {
- task_numa_fault(page_nid, last_cpu, 1);
- put_page(page);
- }
out:
return 0;
migrate:
+ get_page(page);
pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl);
- if (migrate_misplaced_page(page, node)) {
+ migrate_misplaced_page(page, new_node);
+
+ /* Re-check after migration: */
+
+ ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
+ spin_lock(ptl);
+ entry = ACCESS_ONCE(*ptep);
+
+ if (!pte_numa(vma, entry))
goto out;
- }
- page = NULL;
- ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
- if (!pte_same(*ptep, entry))
- goto out_unlock;
+ page = vm_normal_page(vma, address, entry);
+ goto out_pte_upgrade;
+}
- goto out_pte_upgrade_unlock;
+/*
+ * Add a simple loop to also fetch ptes within the same pmd:
+ */
+static int do_numa_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+ unsigned long addr0, pte_t *ptep0, pmd_t *pmd,
+ unsigned int flags, pte_t entry0)
+{
+ unsigned long addr0_pmd = addr0 & PMD_MASK;
+ unsigned long addr_start;
+ unsigned long addr;
+ spinlock_t *ptl;
+ int entries = 0;
+ pte_t *ptep;
+
+ addr_start = max(addr0_pmd, vma->vm_start);
+ ptep = pte_offset_map(pmd, addr_start);
+
+ ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
+ spin_lock(ptl);
+
+ for (addr = addr_start; addr < vma->vm_end; addr += PAGE_SIZE, ptep++) {
+ pte_t entry;
+
+ entry = ACCESS_ONCE(*ptep);
+
+ if ((addr & PMD_MASK) != addr0_pmd)
+ break;
+ if (!pte_present(entry))
+ continue;
+ if (!pte_numa(vma, entry))
+ continue;
+
+ __do_numa_page(mm, vma, addr, ptep, pmd, flags, entry, ptl);
+ entries++;
+ }
+
+ pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl);
+
+ return 0;
}
/*
@@ -3536,6 +3566,7 @@ int handle_pte_fault(struct mm_struct *m
spinlock_t *ptl;
entry = ACCESS_ONCE(*pte);
+
if (!pte_present(entry)) {
if (pte_none(entry)) {
if (vma->vm_ops) {
--
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