lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 6/8] mm: handle_speculative_fault()


On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> >
> > depends on the workload; on a many-threads-java workload, you also get
> > it for write quite a bit (lots of malloc/frees in userspace in addition
> > to pagefaults).. at which point you do end up serializing on the
> > zeroing.
> >
> > There's some real life real big workloads that show this pretty badly;
> > so far the workaround is to have glibc batch up a lot of the free()s..
> > but that's just pushing it a little further out.
>
> Again mmap_sem is a rwsem and only a read lock is held. Zeroing in
> do_anonymous_page can occur concurrently on multiple processors in the
> same address space. The pte lock is intentionally taken *after* zeroing to
> allow concurrent zeroing to occur.

You're missing what Arjan said - the jav workload does a lot of memory
allocations too, causing mmap/munmap.

So now some paths are indeed holding it for writing (or need to wait for
it to become writable). And the fairness of rwsems quite possibly then
impacts throughput a _lot_..

(Side note: I wonder if we should wake up _all_ readers when we wake up
any. Right now, we wake up all readers - but only until we hit a writer.
Which is the _fair_ thing to do, but it does mean that we can end up in
horrible patterns of alternating readers/writers, when it could be much
better to just say "release the hounds" and let all pending readers go
after a writer has had its turn).

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-01-07 17:23    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans