linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Eliminate zone->lock contention for will-it-scale/page

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5fa1b7f6-4614-c0d9-9f85-007cdd049a5b@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:20:14 -0400
From:   Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
To:     Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@...el.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Eliminate zone->lock contention for
 will-it-scale/page_fault1 and parallel free

On 03/21/2018 09:30 PM, Aaron Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:44:25PM -0400, Daniel Jordan wrote:
>> On 03/20/2018 04:54 AM, Aaron Lu wrote:
>> ...snip...
>>> reduced zone->lock contention on free path from 35% to 1.1%. Also, it
>>> shows good result on parallel free(*) workload by reducing zone->lock
>>> contention from 90% to almost zero(lru lock increased from almost 0 to
>>> 90% though).
>>
>> Hi Aaron, I'm looking through your series now.  Just wanted to mention that I'm seeing the same interaction between zone->lock and lru_lock in my own testing.  IOW, it's not enough to fix just one or the other: both need attention to get good performance on a big system, at least in this microbenchmark we've both been using.
> 
> Agree.
> 
>>
>> There's anti-scaling at high core counts where overall system page faults per second actually decrease with more CPUs added to the test.  This happens when either zone->lock or lru_lock contention are completely removed, but the anti-scaling goes away when both locks are fixed.
>>
>> Anyway, I'll post some actual data on this stuff soon.
> 
> Looking forward to that, thanks.
> 
> In the meantime, I'll also try your lru_lock optimization work on top of
> this patchset to see if the lock contention shifts back to zone->lock.

The lru_lock series I posted is pretty outdated by now, and I've got a 
totally new approach I plan to post soon, so it might make sense to wait 
for that.