netdev - Re: slab-nomerge (was Re: [git pull] device mapper changes for 4.3)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20150907113026.5bb28ca3@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:30:26 +0200
From:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	brouer@...hat.com, Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
	Joe Thornber <ejt@...hat.com>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Heinz Mauelshagen <heinzm@...hat.com>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: slab-nomerge (was Re: [git pull] device mapper changes for 4.3)


On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 20:51:09 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > The double standard is the problem here. No notification, proof,
> > discussion or review was needed to turn on slab merging for
> > everyone, but you're setting a very high bar to jump if anyone wants
> > to turn it off in their code.
> 
> Ehh. You realize that almost the only load that is actually seriously
> allocator-limited is networking?
> 
> And slub was beating slab on that? And slub has been doing the merging
> since day one. Slab was just changed to try to keep up with the
> winning strategy.

Sorry, I have to correct you on this.  The slub allocator is not as
fast as you might think.  The slab allocator is actually faster for
networking.

IP-forwarding, single CPU, single flow UDP (highly tuned):
 * Allocator slub: 2043575 pps
 * Allocator slab: 2088295 pps

Difference slab faster than slub:
 * +44720 pps and -10.48ns

The slub allocator have a faster "fastpath", if your workload is
fast-reusing within the same per-cpu page-slab, but once the workload
increases you hit the slowpath, and then slab catches up. Slub looks
great in micro-benchmarking.


As you can see in patchset:
 [PATCH 0/3] Network stack, first user of SLAB/kmem_cache bulk free API.
 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/137469/focus=376625

I'm working on speeding up slub to the level of slab.  And it seems
like I have succeeded with half-a-nanosec 2090522 pps (+2227 pps or
0.51 ns).

And with "slab_nomerge" I get even high performance:
 * slub: bulk-free and slab_nomerge: 2121824 pps
 * Diff to slub: +78249 and -18.05ns

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
  Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html