[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y3U3zPzLMux8fpVY@pc638.lan>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:19:40 +0100
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rcu/kfree: Do not request RCU when not needed
Hello, Paul, Joel.
> >
> > Yes sure, I am doing a run now with my patch. However, I have a
> > question -- why do you feel blocking in the kworker is not an issue?
> > You are taking a snapshot before queuing the normal kwork and then
> > reading the snapshot when the normal kwork runs. Considering it is a
> > high priority queue, the delay between when you are taking the
> > snapshot, and reading it is likely small so there is a bigger chance
> > of blocking in cond_synchronize_rcu(). Did I miss something?
> >
> We can wait indeed in the reclaim worker. But the worker does not do any
> nasty or extra work here. If there is a need we block and wait. After a
> grace period, we are awoken and proceed.
>
> Therefore i do not see the reason in handling two cases:
>
> if (gp_done)
> queue_work();
> else
> queue_rcu_work();
>
> it is the same if we just queue the work and check on entry. The current
> scenario is: queue the work after a grace period. This is the difference.
>
> Right if the reclaimer was a high prio kthread a time would be shorter.
>
> In your scenario the time seems even shorter(i have not checked) because
> you update a snapshot of krcp each time a kvfree_rcu() is invoked. So
> basically even though you have objects whose grace period is passed you
> do not separate it anyhow. Because you update the:
>
> krcp->gp_snap = get_state_synchronize_rcu();
>
> too often.
>
Once upon a time we discussed that it is worth to keep track of GP
per-a-page in order to reduce a memory footprint. Below patch addresses
it:
<snip>
>From 76fc6a1398f22341758edcd9aa911127e0cf5129 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 19:26:27 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/1] rcu: kvfree_rcu: Reduce a memory footptint by using
polling APIs
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 6564718459 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1110, memory footprint: 5057MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 8431051895 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1109, memory footprint: 2749MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 9477830789 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1158, memory footprint: 2934MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 9950211144 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 981, memory footprint: 2704MB
with a patch:
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 7712110118 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1660, memory footprint: 91MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 7002403664 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1482, memory footprint: 86MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 7842282319 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1738, memory footprint: 86MB
Total time taken by all kfree'ers: 7230161977 ns, loops: 10000, batches: 1542, memory footprint: 72MB
Tested with NOCB option, all offloading CPUs:
kvm.sh --memory 10G --torture rcuscale --allcpus --duration 1 \
--kconfig CONFIG_NR_CPUS=64 \
--kconfig CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y \
--kconfig CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_DEFAULT_ALL=y \
--bootargs "rcuscale.kfree_rcu_test=1 rcuscale.kfree_nthreads=16 \
rcuscale.holdoff=20 rcuscale.kfree_loops=10000 torture.disable_onoff_at_boot" --trust-make
According to data there is a big gain in memory footprint with a patch.
It is because of call_rcu() and call_rcu_flush() take more effort and
time to queue a callback and then wait for a gp.
With polling API:
a) we do not need to queue any callback;
b) we might not even need wait for a GP completion.
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com>
---
kernel/rcu/tree.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index 76973d716921..6a1f66dd5f09 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -2900,13 +2900,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(call_rcu);
/**
* struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data - single block to store kvfree_rcu() pointers
+ * @gp_snap: Snapshot of current GP for objects in a page
* @nr_records: Number of active pointers in the array
+ * @list: Page list
* @next: Next bulk object in the block chain
* @records: Array of the kvfree_rcu() pointers
*/
struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data {
+ unsigned long gp_snap;
unsigned long nr_records;
- struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *next;
+ struct list_head list;
void *records[];
};
@@ -2919,24 +2922,26 @@ struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data {
((PAGE_SIZE - sizeof(struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data)) / sizeof(void *))
/**
+ * @rcu_work: A work to reclaim a memory after a grace period
* struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work - single batch of kfree_rcu() requests
- * @rcu_work: Let queue_rcu_work() invoke workqueue handler after grace period
* @head_free: List of kfree_rcu() objects waiting for a grace period
- * @bkvhead_free: Bulk-List of kvfree_rcu() objects waiting for a grace period
+ * @head_free_gp_snap: Snapshot of current GP for "@head_free" objects
* @krcp: Pointer to @kfree_rcu_cpu structure
*/
struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work {
- struct rcu_work rcu_work;
+ struct work_struct rcu_work;
struct rcu_head *head_free;
- struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *bkvhead_free[FREE_N_CHANNELS];
+ unsigned long head_free_gp_snap;
+
+ struct list_head page_free_head[FREE_N_CHANNELS];
struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp;
};
/**
* struct kfree_rcu_cpu - batch up kfree_rcu() requests for RCU grace period
* @head: List of kfree_rcu() objects not yet waiting for a grace period
- * @bkvhead: Bulk-List of kvfree_rcu() objects not yet waiting for a grace period
+ * @page_head: Bulk-List of kvfree_rcu() objects not yet waiting for a grace period
* @krw_arr: Array of batches of kfree_rcu() objects waiting for a grace period
* @lock: Synchronize access to this structure
* @monitor_work: Promote @head to @head_free after KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES
@@ -2960,7 +2965,7 @@ struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work {
*/
struct kfree_rcu_cpu {
struct rcu_head *head;
- struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *bkvhead[FREE_N_CHANNELS];
+ struct list_head page_head[FREE_N_CHANNELS];
struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work krw_arr[KFREE_N_BATCHES];
raw_spinlock_t lock;
struct delayed_work monitor_work;
@@ -3060,60 +3065,62 @@ drain_page_cache(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
static void kfree_rcu_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
unsigned long flags;
- struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *bkvhead[FREE_N_CHANNELS], *bnext;
+ struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data *page, *n;
+ struct list_head local_page_head[FREE_N_CHANNELS];
struct rcu_head *head, *next;
struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp;
struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work *krwp;
+ unsigned long head_free_gp_snap;
int i, j;
- krwp = container_of(to_rcu_work(work),
- struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work, rcu_work);
+ krwp = container_of(work,
+ struct kfree_rcu_cpu_work, rcu_work);
krcp = krwp->krcp;
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&krcp->lock, flags);
// Channels 1 and 2.
- for (i = 0; i < FREE_N_CHANNELS; i++) {
- bkvhead[i] = krwp->bkvhead_free[i];
- krwp->bkvhead_free[i] = NULL;
- }
+ for (i = 0; i < FREE_N_CHANNELS; i++)
+ // Initialized or empty it does not matter just replace.
+ list_replace_init(&krwp->page_free_head[i], &local_page_head[i]);
// Channel 3.
head = krwp->head_free;
krwp->head_free = NULL;
+
+ head_free_gp_snap = krwp->head_free_gp_snap;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
// Handle the first two channels.
for (i = 0; i < FREE_N_CHANNELS; i++) {
- for (; bkvhead[i]; bkvhead[i] = bnext) {
- bnext = bkvhead[i]->next;
- debug_rcu_bhead_unqueue(bkvhead[i]);
+ // Start from the tail page, so a GP is likely passed for it.
+ list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(page, n, &local_page_head[i], list) {
+ cond_synchronize_rcu(page->gp_snap);
+ debug_rcu_bhead_unqueue(page);
rcu_lock_acquire(&rcu_callback_map);
if (i == 0) { // kmalloc() / kfree().
trace_rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback(
- rcu_state.name, bkvhead[i]->nr_records,
- bkvhead[i]->records);
+ rcu_state.name, page->nr_records,
+ page->records);
- kfree_bulk(bkvhead[i]->nr_records,
- bkvhead[i]->records);
+ kfree_bulk(page->nr_records, page->records);
} else { // vmalloc() / vfree().
- for (j = 0; j < bkvhead[i]->nr_records; j++) {
+ for (j = 0; j < page->nr_records; j++) {
trace_rcu_invoke_kvfree_callback(
- rcu_state.name,
- bkvhead[i]->records[j], 0);
+ rcu_state.name, page->records[j], 0);
- vfree(bkvhead[i]->records[j]);
+ vfree(page->records[j]);
}
}
rcu_lock_release(&rcu_callback_map);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&krcp->lock, flags);
- if (put_cached_bnode(krcp, bkvhead[i]))
- bkvhead[i] = NULL;
+ if (put_cached_bnode(krcp, page))
+ page = NULL;
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
- if (bkvhead[i])
- free_page((unsigned long) bkvhead[i]);
+ if (page)
+ free_page((unsigned long) page);
cond_resched_tasks_rcu_qs();
}
@@ -3126,6 +3133,9 @@ static void kfree_rcu_work(struct work_struct *work)
* queued on a linked list through their rcu_head structures.
* This list is named "Channel 3".
*/
+ if (head)
+ cond_synchronize_rcu(head_free_gp_snap);
+
for (; head; head = next) {
unsigned long offset = (unsigned long)head->func;
void *ptr = (void *)head - offset;
@@ -3149,7 +3159,7 @@ need_offload_krc(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
int i;
for (i = 0; i < FREE_N_CHANNELS; i++)
- if (krcp->bkvhead[i])
+ if (!list_empty(&krcp->page_head[i]))
return true;
return !!krcp->head;
@@ -3191,16 +3201,15 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
// a previous RCU batch is in progress, it means that
// immediately to queue another one is not possible so
// in that case the monitor work is rearmed.
- if ((krcp->bkvhead[0] && !krwp->bkvhead_free[0]) ||
- (krcp->bkvhead[1] && !krwp->bkvhead_free[1]) ||
+ if ((!list_empty(&krcp->page_head[0]) && list_empty(&krwp->page_free_head[0])) ||
+ (!list_empty(&krcp->page_head[1]) && list_empty(&krwp->page_free_head[1])) ||
(krcp->head && !krwp->head_free)) {
+
// Channel 1 corresponds to the SLAB-pointer bulk path.
// Channel 2 corresponds to vmalloc-pointer bulk path.
for (j = 0; j < FREE_N_CHANNELS; j++) {
- if (!krwp->bkvhead_free[j]) {
- krwp->bkvhead_free[j] = krcp->bkvhead[j];
- krcp->bkvhead[j] = NULL;
- }
+ if (list_empty(&krwp->page_free_head[j]))
+ list_replace_init(&krcp->page_head[j], &krwp->page_free_head[j]);
}
// Channel 3 corresponds to both SLAB and vmalloc
@@ -3208,6 +3217,11 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
if (!krwp->head_free) {
krwp->head_free = krcp->head;
krcp->head = NULL;
+
+ // Take a snapshot for this krwp. Please note no more
+ // any objects can be added to attached head_free channel
+ // therefore fixate a GP for it here.
+ krwp->head_free_gp_snap = get_state_synchronize_rcu();
}
WRITE_ONCE(krcp->count, 0);
@@ -3217,7 +3231,7 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
// be that the work is in the pending state when
// channels have been detached following by each
// other.
- queue_rcu_work(system_wq, &krwp->rcu_work);
+ queue_work(system_wq, &krwp->rcu_work);
}
}
@@ -3312,10 +3326,11 @@ add_ptr_to_bulk_krc_lock(struct kfree_rcu_cpu **krcp,
return false;
idx = !!is_vmalloc_addr(ptr);
+ bnode = list_first_entry_or_null(&(*krcp)->page_head[idx],
+ struct kvfree_rcu_bulk_data, list);
/* Check if a new block is required. */
- if (!(*krcp)->bkvhead[idx] ||
- (*krcp)->bkvhead[idx]->nr_records == KVFREE_BULK_MAX_ENTR) {
+ if (!bnode || bnode->nr_records == KVFREE_BULK_MAX_ENTR) {
bnode = get_cached_bnode(*krcp);
if (!bnode && can_alloc) {
krc_this_cpu_unlock(*krcp, *flags);
@@ -3339,18 +3354,16 @@ add_ptr_to_bulk_krc_lock(struct kfree_rcu_cpu **krcp,
if (!bnode)
return false;
- /* Initialize the new block. */
+ /* Initialize a new block. */
bnode->nr_records = 0;
- bnode->next = (*krcp)->bkvhead[idx];
-
- /* Attach it to the head. */
- (*krcp)->bkvhead[idx] = bnode;
+ list_add(&bnode->list, &(*krcp)->page_head[idx]);
}
/* Finally insert. */
- (*krcp)->bkvhead[idx]->records
- [(*krcp)->bkvhead[idx]->nr_records++] = ptr;
+ bnode->records[bnode->nr_records++] = ptr;
+ /* Keep updated a GP status of this page. */
+ bnode->gp_snap = get_state_synchronize_rcu();
return true;
}
@@ -4790,7 +4803,7 @@ struct workqueue_struct *rcu_gp_wq;
static void __init kfree_rcu_batch_init(void)
{
int cpu;
- int i;
+ int i, j;
/* Clamp it to [0:100] seconds interval. */
if (rcu_delay_page_cache_fill_msec < 0 ||
@@ -4808,10 +4821,16 @@ static void __init kfree_rcu_batch_init(void)
struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp = per_cpu_ptr(&krc, cpu);
for (i = 0; i < KFREE_N_BATCHES; i++) {
- INIT_RCU_WORK(&krcp->krw_arr[i].rcu_work, kfree_rcu_work);
+ INIT_WORK(&krcp->krw_arr[i].rcu_work, kfree_rcu_work);
krcp->krw_arr[i].krcp = krcp;
+
+ for (j = 0; j < FREE_N_CHANNELS; j++)
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&krcp->krw_arr[i].page_free_head[j]);
}
+ for (i = 0; i < FREE_N_CHANNELS; i++)
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&krcp->page_head[i]);
+
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&krcp->monitor_work, kfree_rcu_monitor);
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&krcp->page_cache_work, fill_page_cache_func);
krcp->initialized = true;
--
2.30.2
<snip>
it is pretty simple. It does the following:
1) A GP status is sampled per a page that drives pointers;
2) Reclaim is done in reverse order because an oldest page more likely passed its GP;
3) Returning a memory occurs faster thus it reduces a memory footprint;
4) Improves readability of the code.
Any inputs? I will test and check on our devices with real workloads.
--
Uladzislau Rezki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists