lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151207073523.GA27292@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
Date:	Mon, 7 Dec 2015 16:35:24 +0900
From:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
To:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:	Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] reduce latency of direct async compaction

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 01:34:09PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 12:52 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:35:08PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >>On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 10:38:50AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >>>On 12/03/2015 10:25 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> >>>>On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 09:10:44AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >>
> >>My bad, I uploaded the wrong data :-/
> >>I uploaded again:
> >>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49uX3igf4K4UFI4TEQ3THYta0E
> >>
> >>And I just run the base tree with trace-cmd and found that its
> >>performace drops significantly(from 1000MB/s to 6xxMB/s), is it that
> >>trace-cmd will impact performace a lot?
> 
> Yeah it has some overhead depending on how many events it has to
> process. Your workload is quite sensitive to that.
> 
> >>Any suggestions on how to run
> >>the test regarding trace-cmd? i.e. should I aways run usemem under
> >>trace-cmd or only when necessary?
> 
> I'd run it with tracing only when the goal is to collect traces, but
> not for any performance comparisons. Also it's not useful to collect
> perf data while also tracing.
> 
> >I just run the test with the base tree and with this patch series
> >applied(head), I didn't use trace-cmd this time.
> >
> >The throughput for base tree is 963MB/s while the head is 815MB/s, I
> >have attached pagetypeinfo/proc-vmstat/perf-profile for them.
> 
> The compact stats improvements look fine, perhaps better than in my tests:
> 
> base: compact_migrate_scanned 3476360
> head: compact_migrate_scanned 1020827
> 
> - that's the eager skipping of patch 2
> 
> base: compact_free_scanned 5924928
> head: compact_free_scanned 0
>       compact_free_direct 918813
>       compact_free_direct_miss 500308
> 
> As your workload does exclusively async direct compaction through
> THP faults, the traditional free scanner isn't used at all. Direct
> allocations should be much cheaper, although the "miss" ratio (the
> allocations that were from the same pageblock as the one we are
> compacting) is quite high. I should probably look into making
> migration release pages to the tails of the freelists - could be
> that it's grabbing the very pages that were just freed in the
> previous COMPACT_CLUSTER_MAX cycle (modulo pcplist buffering).
> 
> I however find it strange that your original stats (4.3?) differ
> from the base so much:
> 
> compact_migrate_scanned 1982396
> compact_free_scanned 40576943
> 
> That was order of magnitude more free scanned on 4.3, and half the
> migrate scanned. But your throughput figures in the other mail
> suggested a regression from 4.3 to 4.4, which would be the opposite
> of what the stats say. And anyway, compaction code didn't change
> between 4.3 and 4.4 except changes to tracepoint format...
> 
> moving on...
> base:
> compact_isolated 731304
> compact_stall 10561
> compact_fail 9459
> compact_success 1102
> 
> head:
> compact_isolated 921087
> compact_stall 14451
> compact_fail 12550
> compact_success 1901
> 
> More success in both isolation and compaction results.
> 
> base:
> thp_fault_alloc 45337
> thp_fault_fallback 2349
> 
> head:
> thp_fault_alloc 45564
> thp_fault_fallback 2120
> 
> Somehow the extra compact success didn't fully translate to thp
> alloc success... But given how many of the alloc's didn't even
> involve a compact_stall (two thirds of them), that interpretation
> could also be easily misleading. So, hard to say.
> 
> Looking at the perf profiles...
> base:
>     54.55%    54.55%            :1550  [kernel.kallsyms]   [k]
> pageblock_pfn_to_page
> 
> head:
>     40.13%    40.13%            :1551  [kernel.kallsyms]   [k]
> pageblock_pfn_to_page
> 
> Since the freepage allocation doesn't hit this code anymore, it
> shows that the bulk was actually from the migration scanner,
> although the perf callgraph and vmstats suggested otherwise.

It looks like overhead still remain. I guess that migration scanner
would call pageblock_pfn_to_page() for more extended range so
overhead still remain.

I have an idea to solve his problem. Aaron, could you test following patch
on top of base? It tries to skip calling pageblock_pfn_to_page()
if we check that zone is contiguous at initialization stage.

Thanks.

---->8----
>From 9c4fbf8f8ed37eb88a04a97908e76ba2437404a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:51:42 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] mm/compaction: Optimize pageblock_pfn_to_page() for
 contiguous zone

Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
---
 include/linux/mmzone.h |  1 +
 mm/compaction.c        | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
index e23a9e7..573f9a9 100644
--- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
+++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
@@ -521,6 +521,7 @@ struct zone {
 #endif
 
 #if defined CONFIG_COMPACTION || defined CONFIG_CMA
+       int                     contiguous;
        /* Set to true when the PG_migrate_skip bits should be cleared */
        bool                    compact_blockskip_flush;
 #endif
diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
index 67b8d90..f4e8c89 100644
--- a/mm/compaction.c
+++ b/mm/compaction.c
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static inline bool migrate_async_suitable(int migratetype)
  * the first and last page of a pageblock and avoid checking each individual
  * page in a pageblock.
  */
-static struct page *pageblock_pfn_to_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
+static struct page *__pageblock_pfn_to_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
                                unsigned long end_pfn, struct zone *zone)
 {
        struct page *start_page;
@@ -114,6 +114,37 @@ static struct page *pageblock_pfn_to_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
        return start_page;
 }
 
+static inline struct page *pageblock_pfn_to_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
+                               unsigned long end_pfn, struct zone *zone)
+{
+       if (zone->contiguous == 1)
+               return pfn_to_page(start_pfn);
+
+       return __pageblock_pfn_to_page(start_pfn, end_pfn, zone);
+}
+
+static void check_zone_contiguous(struct zone *zone)
+{
+       unsigned long pfn = zone->zone_start_pfn;
+       unsigned long end_pfn = zone_end_pfn(zone);
+
+       /* Already checked */
+       if (zone->contiguous)
+               return;
+
+       pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, pageblock_nr_pages);
+       for (; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += pageblock_nr_pages) {
+               if (!__pageblock_pfn_to_page(pfn, end_pfn, zone)) {
+                       /* We have hole */
+                       zone->contiguous = -1;
+                       return;
+               }
+       }
+
+       /* We don't have hole */
+       zone->contiguous = 1;
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_COMPACTION
 
 /* Do not skip compaction more than 64 times */
@@ -1353,6 +1384,8 @@ static int compact_zone(struct zone *zone, struct compact_control *cc)
                ;
        }
 
+       check_zone_contiguous(zone);
+
        /*
         * Clear pageblock skip if there were failures recently and compaction
         * is about to be retried after being deferred. kswapd does not do
-- 
1.9.1


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ