[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <yvghqmbugs3oejsvbh5rrw76rvtr2wfwqysjd7tw67z4tzpdbp@6zehhuzumiez>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2025 21:10:20 +0100
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jack@...e.cz, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Optimize rss_stat initialization/teardown for
single-threaded tasks
On Fri 28-11-25 08:30:08, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2025-11-27 18:36, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> > The cost of the pcpu memory allocation is non-negligible for systems
> > with many cpus, and it is quite visible when forking a new task, as
> > reported in a few occasions.
> I've come to the same conclusion within the development of
> the hierarchical per-cpu counters.
>
> But while the mm_struct has a SLAB cache (initialized in
> kernel/fork.c:mm_cache_init()), there is no such thing
> for the per-mm per-cpu data.
>
> In the mm_struct, we have the following per-cpu data (please
> let me know if I missed any in the maze):
>
> - struct mm_cid __percpu *pcpu_cid (or equivalent through
> struct mm_mm_cid after Thomas Gleixner gets his rewrite
> upstream),
>
> - unsigned int __percpu *futex_ref,
>
> - NR_MM_COUNTERS rss_stats per-cpu counters.
>
> What would really reduce memory allocation overhead on fork
> is to move all those fields into a top level
> "struct mm_percpu_struct" as a first step. This would
> merge 3 per-cpu allocations into one when forking a new
> task.
>
> Then the second step is to create a mm_percpu_struct
> cache to bypass the per-cpu allocator.
>
> I suspect that by doing just that we'd get most of the
> performance benefits provided by the single-threaded special-case
> proposed here.
I don't think so. Because in the profiles I have been doing for these
loads the biggest cost wasn't actually the per-cpu allocation itself but
the cost of zeroing the allocated counter for many CPUs (and then the
counter summarization on exit) and you're not going to get rid of that with
just reshuffling per-cpu fields and adding slab allocator in front.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists