From: "Ma, Yu" <yu.ma@intel.com>
To: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
Cc: "Liam.Howlett@Oracle.com" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Zhu, Lipeng" <lipeng.zhu@intel.com>,
"Deng, Pan" <pan.deng@intel.com>,
"shakeelb@google.com" <shakeelb@google.com>,
"Li, Tianyou" <tianyou.li@intel.com>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
"tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] percpu-internal/pcpu_chunk: Re-layout pcpu_chunk structure to reduce false sharing
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 00:12:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SN7PR11MB759041E7DB7877D148091D68E156A@SN7PR11MB7590.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZINtij2HhIu9h9Wx@V92F7Y9K0C.lan>
> Hi Yu,
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 03:02:32PM +0000, Ma, Yu wrote:
> > Thanks Liam and Dennis for review, this is updated patch with comment
> around:
> >
> > > When running UnixBench/Execl throughput case, false sharing is
> > > observed due to frequent read on base_addr and write on free_bytes,
> chunk_md.
> > >
> > > UnixBench/Execl represents a class of workload where bash scripts
> > > are spawned frequently to do some short jobs. It will do system call
> > > on execl frequently, and execl will call mm_init to initialize mm_struct of
> the process.
> > > mm_init will call __percpu_counter_init for percpu_counters initialization.
> > > Then pcpu_alloc is called to read the base_addr of pcpu_chunk for
> > > memory allocation. Inside pcpu_alloc, it will call pcpu_alloc_area
> > > to allocate memory from a specified chunk.
> > > This function will update "free_bytes" and "chunk_md" to record the
> > > rest free bytes and other meta data for this chunk. Correspondingly,
> > > pcpu_free_area will also update these 2 members when free memory.
> > > Call trace from perf is as below:
> > > + 57.15% 0.01% execl [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __percpu_counter_init
> > > + 57.13% 0.91% execl [kernel.kallsyms] [k] pcpu_alloc
> > > - 55.27% 54.51% execl [kernel.kallsyms] [k] osq_lock
> > > - 53.54% 0x654278696e552f34
> > > main
> > > __execve
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> > > do_syscall_64
> > > __x64_sys_execve
> > > do_execveat_common.isra.47
> > > alloc_bprm
> > > mm_init
> > > __percpu_counter_init
> > > pcpu_alloc
> > > - __mutex_lock.isra.17
> > >
> > > In current pcpu_chunk layout, ‘base_addr’ is in the same cache line
> > > with ‘free_bytes’ and ‘chunk_md’, and ‘base_addr’ is at the last 8
> > > bytes. This patch moves ‘bound_map’ up to ‘base_addr’, to let
> > > ‘base_addr’ locate in a new cacheline.
> > >
> > > With this change, on Intel Sapphire Rapids 112C/224T platform, based
> > > on v6.4-rc4, the 160 parallel score improves by 24%.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Yu Ma <yu.ma@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/percpu-internal.h | 8 +++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/percpu-internal.h b/mm/percpu-internal.h index
> > > f9847c131998..ecc7be1ec876 100644
> > > --- a/mm/percpu-internal.h
> > > +++ b/mm/percpu-internal.h
> > > @@ -41,10 +41,16 @@ struct pcpu_chunk {
> > > struct list_head list; /* linked to pcpu_slot lists */
> > > int free_bytes; /* free bytes in the chunk */
> > > struct pcpu_block_md chunk_md;
> > > + unsigned long *bound_map; /* boundary map */
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * To reduce false sharing, current layout is optimized to make sure
> > > + * base_addr locate in the different cacheline with free_bytes and
> > > + * chunk_md.
> > > + */
> > > void *base_addr; /* base address of this chunk
> > > */
> > >
> > > unsigned long *alloc_map; /* allocation map */
> > > - unsigned long *bound_map; /* boundary map */
> > > struct pcpu_block_md *md_blocks; /* metadata blocks */
> > >
> > > void *data; /* chunk data */
> > > --
> > > 2.39.3
> >
>
> Thanks for adding the comment, but would you mind adding
> ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp? Unless that's something we're trying to
> avoid, I think this is a good use case for it both on the pcpu_chunk and
> specifically on base_addr as that's what we're accessing without a lock.
>
Thanks Dennis, I'll send out the updated patch with
____cacheline_aligned_in_smp on base_addr :)
> Thanks,
> Dennis
Regards
Yu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-10 0:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-06 12:54 [PATCH] percpu-internal/pcpu_chunk: Re-layout pcpu_chunk structure to reduce false sharing Yu Ma
2023-06-06 19:21 ` Liam R. Howlett
2023-06-06 21:25 ` Dennis Zhou
2023-06-07 12:50 ` Ma, Yu
2023-06-07 14:50 ` [PATCH v2] " Yu Ma
2023-06-07 15:02 ` Ma, Yu
2023-06-09 18:20 ` Dennis Zhou
2023-06-10 0:12 ` Ma, Yu [this message]
2023-06-10 3:07 ` [PATCH v3] " Yu Ma
2023-06-12 21:43 ` Andrew Morton
2023-06-12 21:55 ` Dennis Zhou
2023-06-13 17:41 ` Ma, Yu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=SN7PR11MB759041E7DB7877D148091D68E156A@SN7PR11MB7590.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=yu.ma@intel.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dennis@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lipeng.zhu@intel.com \
--cc=pan.deng@intel.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).