[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 5/5] hugetlbfs: Limit wait time when trying to share huge PMD
On 9/11/19 6:03 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 9/11/19 8:44 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 9/11/19 4:14 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 04:05:37PM +0100, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> When allocating a large amount of static hugepages (~500-1500GB) on a
>>>> system with large number of CPUs (4, 8 or even 16 sockets), performance
>>>> degradation (random multi-second delays) was observed when thousands
>>>> of processes are trying to fault in the data into the huge pages. The
>>>> likelihood of the delay increases with the number of sockets and hence
>>>> the CPUs a system has. This only happens in the initial setup phase
>>>> and will be gone after all the necessary data are faulted in.
>>> Can;t the application just specify MAP_POPULATE?
>> Originally, I thought that this happened in the startup phase when the
>> pages were faulted in. The problem persists after steady state had been
>> reached though. Every time you have a new user process created, it will
>> have its own page table.
> This is still at fault time. Although, for the particular application it
> may be after the 'startup phase'.
>> It is the sharing of the of huge page shared
>> memory that is causing problem. Of course, it depends on how the
>> application is written.
> It may be the case that some applications would find the delays acceptable
> for the benefit of shared pmds once they reach steady state. As you say, of
> course this depends on how the application is written.
> I know that Oracle DB would not like it if PMD sharing is disabled for them.
> Based on what I know of their model, all processes which share PMDs perform
> faults (write or read) during the startup phase. This is in environments as
> big or bigger than you describe above. I have never looked at/for delays in
> these environments around pmd sharing (page faults), but that does not mean
> they do not exist. I will try to get the DB group to give me access to one
> of their large environments for analysis.
> We may want to consider making the timeout value and disable threshold user
> configurable.

Making it configurable is certainly doable. They can be sysctl
parameters so that the users can reenable PMD sharing by making those
parameters larger.


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-11 19:16    [W:0.054 / U:31.604 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site