linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@intel.com,
	ying.huang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [mm/memcg] bd0b230fe1: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -22.7% regression
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:43:45 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7e40849b-f9e0-34d4-4254-c2c99dd71f78@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201112141654.GC12240@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 11/12/20 9:16 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 12-11-20 20:28:44, Feng Tang wrote:
>> Hi Michal,
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 09:15:46AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Michal,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We used the default configure of cgroups, not sure what configuration you
>>>>>> want,
>>>>>> could you give me more details? and here is the cgroup info of will-it-scale
>>>>>> process:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ cat /proc/3042/cgroup
>>>>>> 12:hugetlb:/
>>>>>> 11:memory:/system.slice/lkp-bootstrap.service
>>>>> OK, this means that memory controler is enabled and in use. Btw. do you
>>>>> get the original performance if you add one phony page_counter after the
>>>>> union?
>>>>>
>>>> I add one phony page_counter after the union and re-test, the regression
>>>> reduced to -1.2%. It looks like the regression caused by the data structure
>>>> layout change.
>>> Thanks for double checking. Could you try to cache align the
>>> page_counter struct? If that helps then we should figure which counters
>>> acks against each other by adding the alignement between the respective
>>> counters.
>> We tried below patch to make the 'page_counter' aligned.
>>    
>>    diff --git a/include/linux/page_counter.h b/include/linux/page_counter.h
>>    index bab7e57..9efa6f7 100644
>>    --- a/include/linux/page_counter.h
>>    +++ b/include/linux/page_counter.h
>>    @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ struct page_counter {
>>     	/* legacy */
>>     	unsigned long watermark;
>>     	unsigned long failcnt;
>>    -};
>>    +} ____cacheline_internodealigned_in_smp;
>>     
>> and with it, the -22.7% peformance change turns to a small -1.7%, which
>> confirms the performance bump is caused by the change to data alignment.
>>
>> After the patch, size of 'page_counter' increases from 104 bytes to 128
>> bytes, and the size of 'mem_cgroup' increases from 2880 bytes to 3008
>> bytes(with our kernel config). Another major data structure which
>> contains 'page_counter' is 'hugetlb_cgroup', whose size will change
>> from 912B to 1024B.
>>
>> Should we make these page_counters aligned to reduce cacheline conflict?
> I would rather focus on a more effective mem_cgroup layout. It is very
> likely that we are just stumbling over two counters here.
>
> Could you try to add cache alignment of counters after memory and see
> which one makes the difference? I do not expect memsw to be the one
> because that one is used together with the main counter. But who knows
> maybe the way it crosses the cache line has the exact effect. Hard to
> tell without other numbers.
>
> Btw. it would be great to see what the effect is on cgroup v2 as well.
>
> Thanks for pursuing this!

The contention may be in the page counters themselves or it can be in 
other fields below the page counters. The cacheline alignment will cause 
"high_work" just after the page counters to start at a cacheline 
boundary. I will try removing the cacheline alignment in the page 
counter and add it to high_work to see there is any change in 
performance. If there is no change, the performance problem will not be 
in the page counters.

Cheers,
Longman


  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-12 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-02  9:15 [mm/memcg] bd0b230fe1: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -22.7% regression kernel test robot
2020-11-02  9:27 ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-02  9:53   ` [LKP] " Rong Chen
2020-11-02 10:02     ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-04  1:20       ` Xing Zhengjun
2020-11-04  2:46         ` Waiman Long
2020-11-04  8:15         ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-12 12:28           ` Feng Tang
2020-11-12 14:16             ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-12 16:43               ` Waiman Long [this message]
2020-11-13  7:39                 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-13  7:34               ` Feng Tang
2020-11-20 11:44                 ` Feng Tang
2020-11-20 13:19                   ` Michal Hocko
2020-11-20 14:30                     ` Feng Tang
2020-11-25  6:24                   ` Feng Tang
2020-11-26  1:34                     ` Waiman Long
2020-11-26 17:39                     ` Linus Torvalds
2020-11-30  8:48                     ` 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=7e40849b-f9e0-34d4-4254-c2c99dd71f78@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=zhengjun.xing@intel.com \
    --cc=zhengjun.xing@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 NNTP newsgroup(s).