On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 09:54:42AM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > 0day robot reported a 9.2% regression for will-it-scale mmap1 test > case[1], caused by commit 57efa1fe5957 ("mm/gup: prevent gup_fast > from racing with COW during fork"). > > Further debug shows the regression is due to that commit changes > the offset of hot fields 'mmap_lock' inside structure 'mm_struct', > thus some cache alignment changes. > > From the perf data, the contention for 'mmap_lock' is very severe > and takes around 95% cpu cycles, and it is a rw_semaphore > > struct rw_semaphore { > atomic_long_t count; /* 8 bytes */ > atomic_long_t owner; /* 8 bytes */ > struct optimistic_spin_queue osq; /* spinner MCS lock */ > ... > > Before commit 57efa1fe5957 adds the 'write_protect_seq', it > happens to have a very optimal cache alignment layout, as > Linus explained: > > "and before the addition of the 'write_protect_seq' field, the > mmap_sem was at offset 120 in 'struct mm_struct'. > > Which meant that count and owner were in two different cachelines, > and then when you have contention and spend time in > rwsem_down_write_slowpath(), this is probably *exactly* the kind > of layout you want. > > Because first the rwsem_write_trylock() will do a cmpxchg on the > first cacheline (for the optimistic fast-path), and then in the > case of contention, rwsem_down_write_slowpath() will just access > the second cacheline. > > Which is probably just optimal for a load that spends a lot of > time contended - new waiters touch that first cacheline, and then > they queue themselves up on the second cacheline." > > After the commit, the rw_semaphore is at offset 128, which means > the 'count' and 'owner' fields are now in the same cacheline, > and causes more cache bouncing. > > Currently there are 3 "#ifdef CONFIG_XXX" before 'mmap_lock' which > will affect its offset: > > CONFIG_MMU > CONFIG_MEMBARRIER > CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_COMPAT_MMAP_BASES > > The layout above is on 64 bits system with 0day's default kernel > config (similar to RHEL-8.3's config), in which all these 3 options > are 'y'. And the layout can vary with different kernel configs. > > Relayouting a structure is usually a double-edged sword, as sometimes > it can helps one case, but hurt other cases. For this case, one > solution is, as the newly added 'write_protect_seq' is a 4 bytes long > seqcount_t (when CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=n), placing it into an > existing 4 bytes hole in 'mm_struct' will not change other fields' > alignment, while restoring the regression. > > [1]. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210525031636.GB7744@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/ > Reported-by: kernel test robot > Signed-off-by: Feng Tang > Reviewed-by: John Hubbard > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe > Cc: Linus Torvalds > Cc: Peter Xu > --- > include/linux/mm_types.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) It seems Ok to me, but didn't we earlier add the has_pinned which would have changed the layout too? Are we chasing performance delta's nobody cares about? Still it is mechanically fine, so: Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe Jason