All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
	Michal Koutn?? <mkoutny@suse.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@google.com>,
	"Sang, Oliver" <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"lkp@lists.01.org" <lkp@lists.01.org>,
	"cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: page_counter: remove unneeded atomic ops for low/min
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:39:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YwLsRqJDRtshKQ1P@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822001737.4120417-2-shakeelb@google.com>

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:17:35AM +0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> For cgroups using low or min protections, the function
> propagate_protected_usage() was doing an atomic xchg() operation
> irrespectively. It only needs to do that operation if the new value of
> protection is different from older one. This patch does that.
> 
> To evaluate the impact of this optimization, on a 72 CPUs machine, we
> ran the following workload in a three level of cgroup hierarchy with top
> level having min and low setup appropriately. More specifically
> memory.min equal to size of netperf binary and memory.low double of
> that.
> 
>  $ netserver -6
>  # 36 instances of netperf with following params
>  $ netperf -6 -H ::1 -l 60 -t TCP_SENDFILE -- -m 10K
> 
> Results (average throughput of netperf):
> Without (6.0-rc1)	10482.7 Mbps
> With patch		14542.5 Mbps (38.7% improvement)
> 
> With the patch, the throughput improved by 38.7%
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>

Thanks!

- Feng

> ---
>  mm/page_counter.c | 13 ++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_counter.c b/mm/page_counter.c
> index eb156ff5d603..47711aa28161 100644
> --- a/mm/page_counter.c
> +++ b/mm/page_counter.c
> @@ -17,24 +17,23 @@ static void propagate_protected_usage(struct page_counter *c,
>  				      unsigned long usage)
>  {
>  	unsigned long protected, old_protected;
> -	unsigned long low, min;
>  	long delta;
>  
>  	if (!c->parent)
>  		return;
>  
> -	min = READ_ONCE(c->min);
> -	if (min || atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, min);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->min));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->min_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
>  			atomic_long_add(delta, &c->parent->children_min_usage);
>  	}
>  
> -	low = READ_ONCE(c->low);
> -	if (low || atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, low);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->low));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->low_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
> -- 
> 2.37.1.595.g718a3a8f04-goog
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: page_counter: remove unneeded atomic ops for low/min
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:39:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YwLsRqJDRtshKQ1P@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822001737.4120417-2-shakeelb@google.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2525 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:17:35AM +0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> For cgroups using low or min protections, the function
> propagate_protected_usage() was doing an atomic xchg() operation
> irrespectively. It only needs to do that operation if the new value of
> protection is different from older one. This patch does that.
> 
> To evaluate the impact of this optimization, on a 72 CPUs machine, we
> ran the following workload in a three level of cgroup hierarchy with top
> level having min and low setup appropriately. More specifically
> memory.min equal to size of netperf binary and memory.low double of
> that.
> 
>  $ netserver -6
>  # 36 instances of netperf with following params
>  $ netperf -6 -H ::1 -l 60 -t TCP_SENDFILE -- -m 10K
> 
> Results (average throughput of netperf):
> Without (6.0-rc1)	10482.7 Mbps
> With patch		14542.5 Mbps (38.7% improvement)
> 
> With the patch, the throughput improved by 38.7%
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>

Thanks!

- Feng

> ---
>  mm/page_counter.c | 13 ++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_counter.c b/mm/page_counter.c
> index eb156ff5d603..47711aa28161 100644
> --- a/mm/page_counter.c
> +++ b/mm/page_counter.c
> @@ -17,24 +17,23 @@ static void propagate_protected_usage(struct page_counter *c,
>  				      unsigned long usage)
>  {
>  	unsigned long protected, old_protected;
> -	unsigned long low, min;
>  	long delta;
>  
>  	if (!c->parent)
>  		return;
>  
> -	min = READ_ONCE(c->min);
> -	if (min || atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, min);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->min));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->min_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
>  			atomic_long_add(delta, &c->parent->children_min_usage);
>  	}
>  
> -	low = READ_ONCE(c->low);
> -	if (low || atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, low);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->low));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->low_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
> -- 
> 2.37.1.595.g718a3a8f04-goog
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Roman Gushchin
	<roman.gushchin-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Muchun Song <songmuchun-EC8Uxl6Npydl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>,
	Michal Koutn?? <mkoutny-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
	<soheil-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	"Sang,
	Oliver" <oliver.sang-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Morton
	<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
	"lkp-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org"
	<lkp-hn68Rpc1hR1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>,
	"cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org"
	<linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>,
	"netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: page_counter: remove unneeded atomic ops for low/min
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 10:39:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YwLsRqJDRtshKQ1P@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822001737.4120417-2-shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:17:35AM +0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> For cgroups using low or min protections, the function
> propagate_protected_usage() was doing an atomic xchg() operation
> irrespectively. It only needs to do that operation if the new value of
> protection is different from older one. This patch does that.
> 
> To evaluate the impact of this optimization, on a 72 CPUs machine, we
> ran the following workload in a three level of cgroup hierarchy with top
> level having min and low setup appropriately. More specifically
> memory.min equal to size of netperf binary and memory.low double of
> that.
> 
>  $ netserver -6
>  # 36 instances of netperf with following params
>  $ netperf -6 -H ::1 -l 60 -t TCP_SENDFILE -- -m 10K
> 
> Results (average throughput of netperf):
> Without (6.0-rc1)	10482.7 Mbps
> With patch		14542.5 Mbps (38.7% improvement)
> 
> With the patch, the throughput improved by 38.7%
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

Reviewed-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

Thanks!

- Feng

> ---
>  mm/page_counter.c | 13 ++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_counter.c b/mm/page_counter.c
> index eb156ff5d603..47711aa28161 100644
> --- a/mm/page_counter.c
> +++ b/mm/page_counter.c
> @@ -17,24 +17,23 @@ static void propagate_protected_usage(struct page_counter *c,
>  				      unsigned long usage)
>  {
>  	unsigned long protected, old_protected;
> -	unsigned long low, min;
>  	long delta;
>  
>  	if (!c->parent)
>  		return;
>  
> -	min = READ_ONCE(c->min);
> -	if (min || atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, min);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->min));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->min_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->min_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
>  			atomic_long_add(delta, &c->parent->children_min_usage);
>  	}
>  
> -	low = READ_ONCE(c->low);
> -	if (low || atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage)) {
> -		protected = min(usage, low);
> +	protected = min(usage, READ_ONCE(c->low));
> +	old_protected = atomic_long_read(&c->low_usage);
> +	if (protected != old_protected) {
>  		old_protected = atomic_long_xchg(&c->low_usage, protected);
>  		delta = protected - old_protected;
>  		if (delta)
> -- 
> 2.37.1.595.g718a3a8f04-goog
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-08-22  2:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-22  0:17 [PATCH 0/3] memcg: optimizatize charge codepath Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17 ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17 ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm: page_counter: remove unneeded atomic ops for low/min Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17   ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17   ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:20   ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:20     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:20     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  2:39   ` Feng Tang [this message]
2022-08-22  2:39     ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  2:39     ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  9:55   ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22  9:55     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:18     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:18       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:18       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 14:55       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 14:55         ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 15:20         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:20           ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 16:06           ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 16:06             ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 16:06             ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-23  9:42           ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-23  9:42             ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-23  9:42             ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 18:23   ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:23     ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:23     ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22  0:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: page_counter: rearrange struct page_counter fields Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17   ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:24   ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:24     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:24     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  4:55     ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  4:55       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 13:06       ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22 13:06         ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  2:10   ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  2:10     ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  2:10     ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  4:59     ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  4:59       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  4:59       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 10:23   ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:23     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:23     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:06     ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 15:06       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 15:15       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:15         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:15         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 16:04         ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 16:04           ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 18:27           ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:27             ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:27             ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22  0:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] memcg: increase MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH to 64 Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:17   ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22  0:24   ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:24     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  0:24     ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2022-08-22  2:30   ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22  2:30     ` Feng Tang
2022-08-22 10:47   ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:47     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 10:47     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:09     ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 15:09       ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 15:22       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 15:22         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 16:07         ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 16:07           ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 16:07           ` Shakeel Butt
2022-08-22 18:37   ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:37     ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 18:37     ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-22 19:34     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 19:34       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-22 19:34       ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-23  2:22       ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-23  2:22         ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-23  2:22         ` Roman Gushchin
2022-08-23  4:49         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-23  4:49           ` Michal Hocko

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=YwLsRqJDRtshKQ1P@feng-clx \
    --to=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=soheil@google.com \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.