lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] mm, page_allocator: Only use per-cpu allocator for irq-safe requests
From
Date
On 01/12/2017 11:43 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 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
>

<snip nice results>

>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
> Acked-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>

Very promising! But I have some worries. Should we put something like
VM_BUG_ON(in_interrupt()) into free_hot_cold_page() and rmqueue_pcplist() to
catch future potential misuses and also document this requirement? Also
free_hot_cold_page() has other call sites besides __free_pages() and I'm not
sure if those are all guaranteed to be !IRQ? E.g. free_hot_cold_page_list()
which is called by release_page() which uses irq-safe lock operations...

Smaller nit below:

> @@ -2453,8 +2450,8 @@ void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *page, bool cold)
>
> migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
> set_pcppage_migratetype(page, migratetype);
> - local_irq_save(flags);
> - __count_vm_event(PGFREE);
> + preempt_disable();
> + count_vm_event(PGFREE);

AFAICS preempt_disable() is enough for using __count_vm_event(), no?

> @@ -2647,9 +2644,8 @@ static struct page *rmqueue_pcplist(struct zone *preferred_zone,
> 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, order, gfp_flags, migratetype,
> @@ -2658,7 +2654,7 @@ static struct page *rmqueue_pcplist(struct zone *preferred_zone,
> __count_zid_vm_events(PGALLOC, page_zonenum(page), 1 << order);

But if I'm wrong above, then this __count should be converted too?

> zone_statistics(preferred_zone, zone, gfp_flags);
> }
> - local_irq_restore(flags);
> + preempt_enable_no_resched();
> return page;
> }
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-12 18:07    [W:0.115 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site