From: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:59:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170809025902.GA17616@yexl-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170808080821.GA31730@bbox>
On 08/08, Minchan Kim wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:51:00PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 09:19:23AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >>> Greeting,
>> >>>
>> >>> FYI, we noticed a -19.3% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> commit: 76742700225cad9df49f05399381ac3f1ec3dc60 ("mm: fix MADV_[FREE|DONTNEED] TLB flush miss problem")
>> >>> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Nadav-Amit/mm-migrate-prevent-racy-access-to-tlb_flush_pending/20170802-205715
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> in testcase: will-it-scale
>> >>> on test machine: 88 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz with 64G memory
>> >>> with following parameters:
>> >>>
>> >>> nr_task: 16
>> >>> mode: process
>> >>> test: brk1
>> >>> cpufreq_governor: performance
>> >>>
>> >>> test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
>> >>> test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the report.
>> >> Could you explain what kinds of workload you are testing?
>> >>
>> >> Does it calls frequently madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) in parallel on multiple
>> >> threads?
>> >
>> > According to the description it is "testcase:brk increase/decrease of one
>> > pagea??. According to the mode it spawns multiple processes, not threads.
>> >
>> > Since a single page is unmapped each time, and the iTLB-loads increase
>> > dramatically, I would suspect that for some reason a full TLB flush is
>> > caused during do_munmap().
>> >
>> > If I find some free time, Ia??ll try to profile the workload - but feel free
>> > to beat me to it.
>>
>> The root-cause appears to be that tlb_finish_mmu() does not call
>> dec_tlb_flush_pending() - as it should. Any chance you can take care of it?
>
>Oops, but with second looking, it seems it's not my fault. ;-)
>https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=150156699114088&w=2
>
>Anyway, thanks for the pointing out.
>xiaolong.ye, could you retest with this fix?
>
I've queued tests for 5 times and results show this patch (e8f682574e4 "mm:
decrease tlb flush pending count in tlb_finish_mmu") does help recover the
performance back.
378005bdbac0a2ec 76742700225cad9df49f053993 e8f682574e45b6406dadfffeb4
---------------- -------------------------- --------------------------
%stddev change %stddev change %stddev
\ | \ | \
3405093 -19% 2747088 -2% 3348752 will-it-scale.per_process_ops
1280 A+- 3% -2% 1257 A+- 3% -6% 1207 vmstat.system.cs
2702 A+- 18% 11% 3002 A+- 19% 17% 3156 A+- 18% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_mapped
10765 A+- 18% 11% 11964 A+- 19% 17% 12588 A+- 18% numa-meminfo.node0.Mapped
0.00 A+- 47% -40% 0.00 A+- 45% -84% 0.00 A+- 42% mpstat.cpu.soft%
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>From 83012114c9cd9304f0d55d899bb4b9329d0e22ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
>Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 17:05:19 +0900
>Subject: [PATCH] mm: decrease tlb flush pending count in tlb_finish_mmu
>
>The tlb pending count increased by tlb_gather_mmu should be decreased
>at tlb_finish_mmu. Otherwise, A lot of TLB happens which makes
>performance regression.
>
>Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
>---
> mm/memory.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
>diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>index 34b1fcb829e4..ad2617552f55 100644
>--- a/mm/memory.c
>+++ b/mm/memory.c
>@@ -423,6 +423,7 @@ void tlb_finish_mmu(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
> bool force = mm_tlb_flush_nested(tlb->mm);
>
> arch_tlb_finish_mmu(tlb, start, end, force);
>+ dec_tlb_flush_pending(tlb->mm);
> }
>
> /*
>--
>2.7.4
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-09 3:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-02 0:08 [PATCH v6 0/7] fixes of TLB batching races Nadav Amit
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] mm: migrate: prevent racy access to tlb_flush_pending Nadav Amit
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] mm: migrate: fix barriers around tlb_flush_pending Nadav Amit
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] Revert "mm: numa: defer TLB flush for THP migration as long as possible" Nadav Amit
2017-08-11 10:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] mm: refactoring TLB gathering API Nadav Amit
2017-08-11 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 17:12 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-14 0:49 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] mm: make tlb_flush_pending global Nadav Amit
2017-08-02 14:28 ` kbuild test robot
2017-08-02 23:23 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-02 23:27 ` Andrew Morton
2017-08-02 23:34 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-03 16:40 ` kbuild test robot
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] mm: fix MADV_[FREE|DONTNEED] TLB flush miss problem Nadav Amit
2017-08-08 1:19 ` [lkp-robot] [mm] 7674270022: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -19.3% regression kernel test robot
2017-08-08 2:28 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-08 4:23 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-08 5:51 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-08 8:08 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-08 8:16 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-09 1:25 ` Ye Xiaolong
2017-08-09 2:59 ` Ye Xiaolong [this message]
2017-08-10 4:13 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-10 4:14 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-10 4:20 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-11 13:30 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] mm: fix MADV_[FREE|DONTNEED] TLB flush miss problem Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-13 6:14 ` Nadav Amit
2017-08-13 12:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-14 1:26 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-02 0:08 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] mm: fix KSM data corruption Nadav Amit
2017-08-02 23:26 ` [PATCH v6 0/7] fixes of TLB batching races Minchan Kim
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=20170809025902.GA17616@yexl-desktop \
--to=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/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 NNTP newsgroup(s).