LKML Archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Yu Ma <yu.ma@intel.com>,
	dennis@kernel.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
	dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	lipeng.zhu@intel.com, pan.deng@intel.com, shakeelb@google.com,
	tianyou.li@intel.com, tim.c.chen@intel.com,
	tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] percpu-internal/pcpu_chunk: Re-layout pcpu_chunk structure to reduce false sharing
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:55:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIeUYNd8sAVm1xE8@V92F7Y9K0C.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230612144331.b1d069bce4ba3800fdd62738@linux-foundation.org>

Hi Andrew,

On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:43:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri,  9 Jun 2023 23:07:30 -0400 Yu Ma <yu.ma@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > 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%.
> 
> Well that's nice.
> 
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/mm/percpu-internal.h
> > +++ b/mm/percpu-internal.h
> > @@ -41,10 +41,17 @@ 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;
> > -	void			*base_addr;	/* base address of this chunk */
> > +	unsigned long		*bound_map;	/* boundary map */
> > +	
> > +	/* 
> > +	 * base_addr is the base address of this chunk.
> > +	 * 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 ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
> >  
> >  	unsigned long		*alloc_map;	/* allocation map */
> > -	unsigned long		*bound_map;	/* boundary map */
> >  	struct pcpu_block_md	*md_blocks;	/* metadata blocks */
> >  
> >  	void			*data;		/* chunk data */
> 
> This will of course consume more memory.  Do we have a feel for the
> worst-case impact of this?
> 

The pcpu_chunk struct is a backing data structure per chunk, so the
additional memory should not be dramatic. A chunk covers ballpark
between 64kb and 512kb memory depending on some config and boot time
stuff, so I believe the additional memory used here is nominal at best.

Working the #s on my desktop:
Percpu:            58624 kB
28 cores -> ~2.1MB of percpu memory.
At say ~128KB per chunk -> 33 chunks, generously 40 chunks.
Adding alignment might bump the chunk size ~64 bytes, so in total ~2KB
of overhead?

I believe we can do a little better to avoid eating that full padding,
so likely less than that.

Acked-by: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>

Thanks,
Dennis

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-12 21:55 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
2023-06-10  3:07       ` [PATCH v3] " Yu Ma
2023-06-12 21:43         ` Andrew Morton
2023-06-12 21:55           ` Dennis Zhou [this message]
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=ZIeUYNd8sAVm1xE8@V92F7Y9K0C.lan \
    --to=dennis@kernel.org \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --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 \
    --cc=yu.ma@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).