lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 15/18] sched: Set preferred NUMA node based on number of private faults
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 01:20:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:20:17PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
> > index cacc64a..04c9469 100644
> > --- a/mm/mprotect.c
> > +++ b/mm/mprotect.c
> > @@ -37,14 +37,15 @@ static inline pgprot_t pgprot_modify(pgprot_t oldprot, pgprot_t newprot)
> >
> > static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
> > unsigned long addr, unsigned long end, pgprot_t newprot,
> > - int dirty_accountable, int prot_numa, bool *ret_all_same_node)
> > + int dirty_accountable, int prot_numa, bool *ret_all_same_nidpid)
> > {
> > struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
> > pte_t *pte, oldpte;
> > spinlock_t *ptl;
> > unsigned long pages = 0;
> > - bool all_same_node = true;
> > + bool all_same_nidpid = true;
> > int last_nid = -1;
> > + int last_pid = -1;
> >
> > pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
> > arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
> > @@ -64,10 +65,17 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
> > page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, oldpte);
> > if (page) {
> > int this_nid = page_to_nid(page);
> > + int nidpid = page_nidpid_last(page);
> > + int this_pid = nidpid_to_pid(nidpid);
> > +
> > if (last_nid == -1)
> > last_nid = this_nid;
> > - if (last_nid != this_nid)
> > - all_same_node = false;
> > + if (last_pid == -1)
> > + last_pid = this_pid;
> > + if (last_nid != this_nid ||
> > + last_pid != this_pid) {
> > + all_same_nidpid = false;
> > + }
>
> At this point I would've expected something like:
>
> int nidpid = page_nidpid_last(page);
> int thisnid = nidpid_to_nid(nidpid);
> int thispid = nidpit_to_pid(nidpit);
>
> It seems 'weird' to mix the state like you did; is there a reason the
> above is incorrect?
>

No there isn't and it looks like a brain fart. I've changed it to what
you suggested.

> >
> > if (!pte_numa(oldpte)) {
> > ptent = pte_mknuma(ptent);
> > @@ -106,7 +114,7 @@ static unsigned long change_pte_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
> > arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode();
> > pte_unmap_unlock(pte - 1, ptl);
> >
> > - *ret_all_same_node = all_same_node;
> > + *ret_all_same_nidpid = all_same_nidpid;
> > return pages;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -133,7 +141,7 @@ static inline unsigned long change_pmd_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > pmd_t *pmd;
> > unsigned long next;
> > unsigned long pages = 0;
> > - bool all_same_node;
> > + bool all_same_nidpid;
> >
> > pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
> > do {
> > @@ -151,7 +159,7 @@ static inline unsigned long change_pmd_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd))
> > continue;
> > pages += change_pte_range(vma, pmd, addr, next, newprot,
> > - dirty_accountable, prot_numa, &all_same_node);
> > + dirty_accountable, prot_numa, &all_same_nidpid);
> >
> > /*
> > * If we are changing protections for NUMA hinting faults then
> > @@ -159,7 +167,7 @@ static inline unsigned long change_pmd_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > * node. This allows a regular PMD to be handled as one fault
> > * and effectively batches the taking of the PTL
> > */
> > - if (prot_numa && all_same_node)
> > + if (prot_numa && all_same_nidpid)
> > change_pmd_protnuma(vma->vm_mm, addr, pmd);
> > } while (pmd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> >
>
> Hurmph I just stumbled upon this PMD 'trick' and I'm not at all sure I
> like it. If an application would pre-fault/initialize its memory with
> the main thread we'll collapse it into a PMDs and forever thereafter (by
> virtue of do_pmd_numa_page()) they'll all stay the same. Resulting in
> PMD granularity.
>

Potentially yes. When that PMD trick was introduced it was because the cost
of faults was very high due to a high scanning rate. The trick mitigated
worse-case scenarios until faults were properly accounted for and the scan
rates were better controlled. As these *should* be addressed by the series
I think I will be adding a patch to kick away this PMD crutch and see how
it looks in profiles.

--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-31 14:01    [W:0.060 / U:7.988 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site