| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20240102184633.748113-11-urezki@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 19:46:32 +0100
From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>
To: linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...y.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 10/11] mm: vmalloc: Set nr_nodes based on CPUs in a system
A number of nodes which are used in the alloc/free paths is
set based on num_possible_cpus() in a system. Please note a
high limit threshold though is fixed and corresponds to 128
nodes.
For 32-bit or single core systems an access to a global vmap
heap is not balanced. Such small systems do not suffer from
lock contentions due to low number of CPUs. In such case the
nr_nodes is equal to 1.
Test on AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X 32-Core Processor:
sudo ./test_vmalloc.sh run_test_mask=7 nr_threads=64
<default perf>
94.41% 0.89% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock
93.35% 93.07% [kernel] [k] native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
76.13% 0.28% [kernel] [k] __vmalloc_node_range
72.96% 0.81% [kernel] [k] alloc_vmap_area
56.94% 0.00% [kernel] [k] __get_vm_area_node
41.95% 0.00% [kernel] [k] vmalloc
37.15% 0.01% [test_vmalloc] [k] full_fit_alloc_test
35.17% 0.00% [kernel] [k] ret_from_fork_asm
35.17% 0.00% [kernel] [k] ret_from_fork
35.17% 0.00% [kernel] [k] kthread
35.08% 0.00% [test_vmalloc] [k] test_func
34.45% 0.00% [test_vmalloc] [k] fix_size_alloc_test
28.09% 0.01% [test_vmalloc] [k] long_busy_list_alloc_test
23.53% 0.25% [kernel] [k] vfree.part.0
21.72% 0.00% [kernel] [k] remove_vm_area
20.08% 0.21% [kernel] [k] find_unlink_vmap_area
2.34% 0.61% [kernel] [k] free_vmap_area_noflush
<default perf>
vs
<patch-series perf>
82.32% 0.22% [test_vmalloc] [k] long_busy_list_alloc_test
63.36% 0.02% [kernel] [k] vmalloc
63.34% 2.64% [kernel] [k] __vmalloc_node_range
30.42% 4.46% [kernel] [k] vfree.part.0
28.98% 2.51% [kernel] [k] __alloc_pages_bulk
27.28% 0.19% [kernel] [k] __get_vm_area_node
26.13% 1.50% [kernel] [k] alloc_vmap_area
21.72% 21.67% [kernel] [k] clear_page_rep
19.51% 2.43% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock
16.61% 16.51% [kernel] [k] native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
13.40% 2.07% [kernel] [k] free_unref_page
10.62% 0.01% [kernel] [k] remove_vm_area
9.02% 8.73% [kernel] [k] insert_vmap_area
8.94% 0.00% [kernel] [k] ret_from_fork_asm
8.94% 0.00% [kernel] [k] ret_from_fork
8.94% 0.00% [kernel] [k] kthread
8.29% 0.00% [test_vmalloc] [k] test_func
7.81% 0.05% [test_vmalloc] [k] full_fit_alloc_test
5.30% 4.73% [kernel] [k] purge_vmap_node
4.47% 2.65% [kernel] [k] free_vmap_area_noflush
<patch-series perf>
confirms that a native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath goes down to
16.51% percent from 93.07%.
The throughput is ~12x higher:
urezki@...38:~$ time sudo ./test_vmalloc.sh run_test_mask=7 nr_threads=64
Run the test with following parameters: run_test_mask=7 nr_threads=64
Done.
Check the kernel ring buffer to see the summary.
real 10m51.271s
user 0m0.013s
sys 0m0.187s
urezki@...38:~$
urezki@...38:~$ time sudo ./test_vmalloc.sh run_test_mask=7 nr_threads=64
Run the test with following parameters: run_test_mask=7 nr_threads=64
Done.
Check the kernel ring buffer to see the summary.
real 0m51.301s
user 0m0.015s
sys 0m0.040s
urezki@...38:~$
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 0c671cb96151..ef534c76daef 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -4879,10 +4879,27 @@ static void vmap_init_free_space(void)
static void vmap_init_nodes(void)
{
struct vmap_node *vn;
- int i, j;
+ int i, n;
+
+#if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
+ /* A high threshold of max nodes is fixed and bound to 128. */
+ n = clamp_t(unsigned int, num_possible_cpus(), 1, 128);
+
+ if (n > 1) {
+ vn = kmalloc_array(n, sizeof(*vn), GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NOWARN);
+ if (vn) {
+ /* Node partition is 16 pages. */
+ vmap_zone_size = (1 << 4) * PAGE_SIZE;
+ nr_vmap_nodes = n;
+ vmap_nodes = vn;
+ } else {
+ pr_err("Failed to allocate an array. Disable a node layer\n");
+ }
+ }
+#endif
- for (i = 0; i < nr_vmap_nodes; i++) {
- vn = &vmap_nodes[i];
+ for (n = 0; n < nr_vmap_nodes; n++) {
+ vn = &vmap_nodes[n];
vn->busy.root = RB_ROOT;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vn->busy.head);
spin_lock_init(&vn->busy.lock);
@@ -4891,9 +4908,9 @@ static void vmap_init_nodes(void)
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vn->lazy.head);
spin_lock_init(&vn->lazy.lock);
- for (j = 0; j < MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES; j++) {
- INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vn->pool[j].head);
- WRITE_ONCE(vn->pool[j].len, 0);
+ for (i = 0; i < MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES; i++) {
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vn->pool[i].head);
+ WRITE_ONCE(vn->pool[i].len, 0);
}
spin_lock_init(&vn->pool_lock);
--
2.39.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists