[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171221081706.GA4831@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 09:17:06 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: kemi <kemi.wang@...el.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
YASUAKI ISHIMATSU <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Dave <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: enlarge NUMA counters threshold size
On Thu 21-12-17 16:06:50, kemi wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年12月20日 18:12, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 20-12-17 13:52:14, kemi wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2017年12月19日 20:40, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>> On Tue 19-12-17 14:39:24, Kemi Wang wrote:
> >>>> We have seen significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by NUMA counters
> >>>> update in multi-threaded page allocation. See 'commit 1d90ca897cb0 ("mm:
> >>>> update NUMA counter threshold size")' for more details.
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch updates NUMA counters to a fixed size of (MAX_S16 - 2) and deals
> >>>> with global counter update using different threshold size for node page
> >>>> stats.
> >>>
> >>> Again, no numbers.
> >>
> >> Compare to vanilla kernel, I don't think it has performance improvement, so
> >> I didn't post performance data here.
> >> But, if you would like to see performance gain from enlarging threshold size
> >> for NUMA stats (compare to the first patch), I will do that later.
> >
> > Please do. I would also like to hear _why_ all counters cannot simply
> > behave same. In other words why we cannot simply increase
> > stat_threshold? Maybe calculate_normal_threshold needs a better scaling
> > for larger machines.
> >
>
> I will add this performance data to changelog in V3 patch series.
>
> Test machine: 2-sockets skylake platform (112 CPUs, 62G RAM)
> Benchmark: page_bench03
> Description: 112 threads do single page allocation/deallocation in parallel.
> before after
> (enlarge threshold size)
> CPU cycles 722 379(-47.5%)
Please describe the numbers some more. Is this an average? What is the
std? Can you see any difference with a more generic workload?
> Some thinking about that:
> a) the overhead due to cache bouncing caused by NUMA counter update in fast path
> severely increase with more and more CPUs cores
What is an effect on a smaller system with fewer CPUs?
> b) AFAIK, the typical usage scenario (similar at least)for which this optimization can
> benefit is 10/40G NIC used in high-speed data center network of cloud service providers.
I would expect those would disable the numa accounting altogether.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists