| 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: <58EB9754.3090202@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 22:31:48 +0800
From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
CC: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: Page allocator order-0 optimizations merged
On 2017/3/1 21:48, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> Hi NetDev community,
>
> I just wanted to make net driver people aware that this MM commit[1] got
> merged and is available in net-next.
>
> commit 374ad05ab64d ("mm, page_alloc: only use per-cpu allocator for irq-safe requests")
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/davem/net-next/c/374ad05ab64d696
>
> It provides approx 14% speedup of order-0 page allocations. I do know
> most driver do their own page-recycling. Thus, this gain will only be
> seen when this page recycling is insufficient, which Tariq was affected
> by AFAIK.
>
> We are also playing with a bulk page allocator facility[2], that I've
> benchmarked[3][4]. While I'm seeing between 34%-46% improvements by
> bulking, I believe we actually need to do better, before it reach our
> performance target for high-speed networking.
>
> --Jesper
>
> [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170109163518.6001-5-mgorman%40techsingularity.net
> [3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170116152518.5519dc1e%40redhat.com
> [4] https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/blob/master/kernel/mm/bench/page_bench04_bulk.c
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:25:03 -0800 akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
>
>> The patch titled
>> Subject: mm, page_alloc: only use per-cpu allocator for irq-safe requests
>> has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
>> mm-page_alloc-only-use-per-cpu-allocator-for-irq-safe-requests.patch
>>
>> This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
>> Subject: mm, page_alloc: only use per-cpu allocator for irq-safe requests
>>
>> Many workloads that allocate pages are not handling an interrupt at a
>> time. As allocation requests may be from IRQ context, it's necessary to
>> disable/enable IRQs for every page allocation. This cost is the bulk of
>> the free path but also a significant percentage of the allocation path.
>>
>> This patch alters the locking and checks such that only irq-safe
>> allocation requests use the per-cpu allocator. All others acquire the
>> irq-safe zone->lock and allocate from the buddy allocator. It relies on
>> disabling preemption to safely access the per-cpu structures. It could be
>> slightly modified to avoid soft IRQs using it but it's not clear it's
>> worthwhile.
>>
>> This modification may slow allocations from IRQ context slightly but the
>> main gain from the per-cpu allocator is that it scales better for
>> allocations from multiple contexts. There is an implicit assumption that
>> intensive allocations from IRQ contexts on multiple CPUs from a single
>> NUMA node are rare and that the fast majority of scaling issues are
>> encountered in !IRQ contexts such as page faulting. It's worth noting
>> that this patch is not required for a bulk page allocator but it
>> significantly reduces the overhead.
>>
>> The following is results from a page allocator micro-benchmark. Only
>> order-0 is interesting as higher orders do not use the per-cpu allocator
>>
>> 4.10.0-rc2 4.10.0-rc2
>> vanilla irqsafe-v1r5
>> Amean alloc-odr0-1 287.15 ( 0.00%) 219.00 ( 23.73%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-2 221.23 ( 0.00%) 183.23 ( 17.18%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-4 187.00 ( 0.00%) 151.38 ( 19.05%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-8 167.54 ( 0.00%) 132.77 ( 20.75%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-16 156.00 ( 0.00%) 123.00 ( 21.15%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-32 149.00 ( 0.00%) 118.31 ( 20.60%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-64 138.77 ( 0.00%) 116.00 ( 16.41%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-128 145.00 ( 0.00%) 118.00 ( 18.62%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-256 136.15 ( 0.00%) 125.00 ( 8.19%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-512 147.92 ( 0.00%) 121.77 ( 17.68%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-1024 147.23 ( 0.00%) 126.15 ( 14.32%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-2048 155.15 ( 0.00%) 129.92 ( 16.26%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-4096 164.00 ( 0.00%) 136.77 ( 16.60%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-8192 166.92 ( 0.00%) 138.08 ( 17.28%)
>> Amean alloc-odr0-16384 159.00 ( 0.00%) 138.00 ( 13.21%)
>> Amean free-odr0-1 165.00 ( 0.00%) 89.00 ( 46.06%)
>> Amean free-odr0-2 113.00 ( 0.00%) 63.00 ( 44.25%)
>> Amean free-odr0-4 99.00 ( 0.00%) 54.00 ( 45.45%)
>> Amean free-odr0-8 88.00 ( 0.00%) 47.38 ( 46.15%)
>> Amean free-odr0-16 83.00 ( 0.00%) 46.00 ( 44.58%)
>> Amean free-odr0-32 80.00 ( 0.00%) 44.38 ( 44.52%)
>> Amean free-odr0-64 72.62 ( 0.00%) 43.00 ( 40.78%)
>> Amean free-odr0-128 78.00 ( 0.00%) 42.00 ( 46.15%)
>> Amean free-odr0-256 80.46 ( 0.00%) 57.00 ( 29.16%)
>> Amean free-odr0-512 96.38 ( 0.00%) 64.69 ( 32.88%)
>> Amean free-odr0-1024 107.31 ( 0.00%) 72.54 ( 32.40%)
>> Amean free-odr0-2048 108.92 ( 0.00%) 78.08 ( 28.32%)
>> Amean free-odr0-4096 113.38 ( 0.00%) 82.23 ( 27.48%)
>> Amean free-odr0-8192 112.08 ( 0.00%) 82.85 ( 26.08%)
>> Amean free-odr0-16384 110.38 ( 0.00%) 81.92 ( 25.78%)
>> Amean total-odr0-1 452.15 ( 0.00%) 308.00 ( 31.88%)
>> Amean total-odr0-2 334.23 ( 0.00%) 246.23 ( 26.33%)
>> Amean total-odr0-4 286.00 ( 0.00%) 205.38 ( 28.19%)
>> Amean total-odr0-8 255.54 ( 0.00%) 180.15 ( 29.50%)
>> Amean total-odr0-16 239.00 ( 0.00%) 169.00 ( 29.29%)
>> Amean total-odr0-32 229.00 ( 0.00%) 162.69 ( 28.96%)
>> Amean total-odr0-64 211.38 ( 0.00%) 159.00 ( 24.78%)
>> Amean total-odr0-128 223.00 ( 0.00%) 160.00 ( 28.25%)
>> Amean total-odr0-256 216.62 ( 0.00%) 182.00 ( 15.98%)
>> Amean total-odr0-512 244.31 ( 0.00%) 186.46 ( 23.68%)
>> Amean total-odr0-1024 254.54 ( 0.00%) 198.69 ( 21.94%)
>> Amean total-odr0-2048 264.08 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 21.24%)
>> Amean total-odr0-4096 277.38 ( 0.00%) 219.00 ( 21.05%)
>> Amean total-odr0-8192 279.00 ( 0.00%) 220.92 ( 20.82%)
>> Amean total-odr0-16384 269.38 ( 0.00%) 219.92 ( 18.36%)
>>
>> This is the alloc, free and total overhead of allocating order-0 pages in
>> batches of 1 page up to 16384 pages. Avoiding disabling/enabling overhead
>> massively reduces overhead. Alloc overhead is roughly reduced by 14-20%
>> in most cases. The free path is reduced by 26-46% and the total reduction
>> is significant.
>>
>> Many users require zeroing of pages from the page allocator which is the
>> vast cost of allocation. Hence, the impact on a basic page faulting
>> benchmark is not that significant
>>
>> 4.10.0-rc2 4.10.0-rc2
>> vanilla irqsafe-v1r5
>> Hmean page_test 656632.98 ( 0.00%) 675536.13 ( 2.88%)
>> Hmean brk_test 3845502.67 ( 0.00%) 3867186.94 ( 0.56%)
>> Stddev page_test 10543.29 ( 0.00%) 4104.07 ( 61.07%)
>> Stddev brk_test 33472.36 ( 0.00%) 15538.39 ( 53.58%)
>> CoeffVar page_test 1.61 ( 0.00%) 0.61 ( 62.15%)
>> CoeffVar brk_test 0.87 ( 0.00%) 0.40 ( 53.84%)
>> Max page_test 666513.33 ( 0.00%) 678640.00 ( 1.82%)
>> Max brk_test 3882800.00 ( 0.00%) 3887008.66 ( 0.11%)
>>
>> This is from aim9 and the most notable outcome is that fault variability
>> is reduced by the patch. The headline improvement is small as the overall
>> fault cost, zeroing, page table insertion etc dominate relative to
>> disabling/enabling IRQs in the per-cpu allocator.
>>
>> Similarly, little benefit was seen on networking benchmarks both localhost
>> and between physical server/clients where other costs dominate. It's
>> possible that this will only be noticable on very high speed networks.
>>
>> Jesper Dangaard Brouer independently tested
>> this with a separate microbenchmark from
>> https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
>>
>> Micro-benchmarked with [1] page_bench02:
>> modprobe page_bench02 page_order=0 run_flags=$((2#010)) loops=$((10**8)); \
>> rmmod page_bench02 ; dmesg --notime | tail -n 4
>>
>> Compared to baseline: 213 cycles(tsc) 53.417 ns
>> - against this : 184 cycles(tsc) 46.056 ns
>> - Saving : -29 cycles
>> - Very close to expected 27 cycles saving [see below [2]]
>>
>> Micro benchmarking via time_bench_sample[3], we get the cost of these
>> operations:
>>
>> time_bench: Type:for_loop Per elem: 0 cycles(tsc) 0.232 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:spin_lock_unlock Per elem: 33 cycles(tsc) 8.334 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:spin_lock_unlock_irqsave Per elem: 62 cycles(tsc) 15.607 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:irqsave_before_lock Per elem: 57 cycles(tsc) 14.344 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:spin_lock_unlock_irq Per elem: 34 cycles(tsc) 8.560 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:simple_irq_disable_before_lock Per elem: 37 cycles(tsc) 9.289 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:local_BH_disable_enable Per elem: 19 cycles(tsc) 4.920 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:local_IRQ_disable_enable Per elem: 7 cycles(tsc) 1.864 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:local_irq_save_restore Per elem: 38 cycles(tsc) 9.665 ns (step:0)
>> [Mel's patch removes a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^] ^^^^^^^^^ expected saving - preempt cost
>> time_bench: Type:preempt_disable_enable Per elem: 11 cycles(tsc) 2.794 ns (step:0)
>> [adds a preempt ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^] ^^^^^^^^^ adds this cost
>> time_bench: Type:funcion_call_cost Per elem: 6 cycles(tsc) 1.689 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:func_ptr_call_cost Per elem: 11 cycles(tsc) 2.767 ns (step:0)
>> time_bench: Type:page_alloc_put Per elem: 211 cycles(tsc) 52.803 ns (step:0)
>>
>> Thus, expected improvement is: 38-11 = 27 cycles.
>>
>> [mgorman@...hsingularity.net: s/preempt_enable_no_resched/preempt_enable/]
>> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170208143128.25ahymqlyspjcixu@techsingularity.net
>> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170123153906.3122-5-mgorman@techsingularity.net
>> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
>> Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
>> Acked-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
>> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
>> Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>> ---
>>
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff -puN mm/page_alloc.c~mm-page_alloc-only-use-per-cpu-allocator-for-irq-safe-requests mm/page_alloc.c
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c~mm-page_alloc-only-use-per-cpu-allocator-for-irq-safe-requests
>> +++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -1085,10 +1085,10 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zo
>> {
>> int migratetype = 0;
>> int batch_free = 0;
>> - unsigned long nr_scanned;
>> + unsigned long nr_scanned, flags;
>> bool isolated_pageblocks;
>>
>> - spin_lock(&zone->lock);
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
>> isolated_pageblocks = has_isolate_pageblock(zone);
>> nr_scanned = node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_PAGES_SCANNED);
>> if (nr_scanned)
>> @@ -1137,7 +1137,7 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zo
>> trace_mm_page_pcpu_drain(page, 0, mt);
>> } while (--count && --batch_free && !list_empty(list));
>> }
>> - spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
>> }
>>
>> static void free_one_page(struct zone *zone,
>> @@ -1145,8 +1145,9 @@ static void free_one_page(struct zone *z
>> unsigned int order,
>> int migratetype)
>> {
>> - unsigned long nr_scanned;
>> - spin_lock(&zone->lock);
>> + unsigned long nr_scanned, flags;
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
>> + __count_vm_events(PGFREE, 1 << order);
>> nr_scanned = node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_PAGES_SCANNED);
>> if (nr_scanned)
>> __mod_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_PAGES_SCANNED, -nr_scanned);
>> @@ -1156,7 +1157,7 @@ static void free_one_page(struct zone *z
>> migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
>> }
>> __free_one_page(page, pfn, zone, order, migratetype);
>> - spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
>> }
>>
>> static void __meminit __init_single_page(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn,
>> @@ -1234,7 +1235,6 @@ void __meminit reserve_bootmem_region(ph
>>
>> static void __free_pages_ok(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>> {
>> - unsigned long flags;
>> int migratetype;
>> unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
>>
>> @@ -1242,10 +1242,7 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct page
>> return;
>>
>> migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
>> - local_irq_save(flags);
>> - __count_vm_events(PGFREE, 1 << order);
>> free_one_page(page_zone(page), page, pfn, order, migratetype);
>> - local_irq_restore(flags);
>> }
>>
>> static void __init __free_pages_boot_core(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>> @@ -2217,8 +2214,9 @@ static int rmqueue_bulk(struct zone *zon
>> int migratetype, bool cold)
>> {
>> int i, alloced = 0;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>>
>> - spin_lock(&zone->lock);
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
>> for (i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
>> struct page *page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype);
>> if (unlikely(page == NULL))
>> @@ -2254,7 +2252,7 @@ static int rmqueue_bulk(struct zone *zon
>> * pages added to the pcp list.
>> */
>> __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_PAGES, -(i << order));
>> - spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
>> return alloced;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -2475,17 +2473,20 @@ void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *pag
>> {
>> struct zone *zone = page_zone(page);
>> struct per_cpu_pages *pcp;
>> - unsigned long flags;
>> unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
>> int migratetype;
>>
>> + if (in_interrupt()) {
>> + __free_pages_ok(page, 0);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> if (!free_pcp_prepare(page))
>> return;
>>
>> migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
>> set_pcppage_migratetype(page, migratetype);
>> - local_irq_save(flags);
>> - __count_vm_event(PGFREE);
>> + preempt_disable();
>>
>> /*
>> * We only track unmovable, reclaimable and movable on pcp lists.
>> @@ -2502,6 +2503,7 @@ void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *pag
>> migratetype = MIGRATE_MOVABLE;
>> }
>>
>> + __count_vm_event(PGFREE);
>> pcp = &this_cpu_ptr(zone->pageset)->pcp;
>> if (!cold)
>> list_add(&page->lru, &pcp->lists[migratetype]);
>> @@ -2515,7 +2517,7 @@ void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *pag
>> }
>>
>> out:
>> - local_irq_restore(flags);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -2640,6 +2642,8 @@ static struct page *__rmqueue_pcplist(st
>> {
>> struct page *page;
>>
>> + VM_BUG_ON(in_interrupt());
>> +
>> do {
>> if (list_empty(list)) {
>> pcp->count += rmqueue_bulk(zone, 0,
>> @@ -2670,9 +2674,8 @@ static struct page *rmqueue_pcplist(stru
>> struct list_head *list;
>> bool cold = ((gfp_flags & __GFP_COLD) != 0);
>> struct page *page;
>> - unsigned long flags;
>>
>> - local_irq_save(flags);
>> + preempt_disable();
>> pcp = &this_cpu_ptr(zone->pageset)->pcp;
>> list = &pcp->lists[migratetype];
>> page = __rmqueue_pcplist(zone, migratetype, cold, pcp, list);
>> @@ -2680,7 +2683,7 @@ static struct page *rmqueue_pcplist(stru
>> __count_zid_vm_events(PGALLOC, page_zonenum(page), 1 << order);
>> zone_statistics(preferred_zone, zone);
>> }
>> - local_irq_restore(flags);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> return page;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -2696,7 +2699,7 @@ struct page *rmqueue(struct zone *prefer
>> unsigned long flags;
>> struct page *page;
>>
>> - if (likely(order == 0)) {
>> + if (likely(order == 0) && !in_interrupt()) {
>> page = rmqueue_pcplist(preferred_zone, zone, order,
>> gfp_flags, migratetype);
>> goto out;
>> _
>>
>> Patches currently in -mm which might be from mgorman@...hsingularity.net are
>>
>>
>>
Hi, Mel
The patch I had test on arm64. I find the great degradation. I test it by micro-bench.
The patrly data is as following. and it is stable. That stands for the allocate and free time.
before apply the patch:
order 0 batch 1 alloc 477 free 251 (unit: ns)
order 0 batch 1 alloc 475 free 250
after apply the patch:
order 0 batch 1 alloc 601 free 369 (unit: ns)
order 0 batch 1 alloc 600 free 370
Thanks
zhongjiang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists