From: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] hugetlbfs: Limit wait time when trying to share huge PMD
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 13:22:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C29A1EFA-148C-454E-91F1-93D5116FB640@lca.pw> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5229662c-d709-7aca-be4c-53dea1a49fda@redhat.com>
> On Sep 11, 2019, at 1:15 PM, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/11/19 6:03 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 9/11/19 8:44 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> On 9/11/19 4:14 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 04:05:37PM +0100, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>> When allocating a large amount of static hugepages (~500-1500GB) on a
>>>>> system with large number of CPUs (4, 8 or even 16 sockets), performance
>>>>> degradation (random multi-second delays) was observed when thousands
>>>>> of processes are trying to fault in the data into the huge pages. The
>>>>> likelihood of the delay increases with the number of sockets and hence
>>>>> the CPUs a system has. This only happens in the initial setup phase
>>>>> and will be gone after all the necessary data are faulted in.
>>>> Can;t the application just specify MAP_POPULATE?
>>> Originally, I thought that this happened in the startup phase when the
>>> pages were faulted in. The problem persists after steady state had been
>>> reached though. Every time you have a new user process created, it will
>>> have its own page table.
>> This is still at fault time. Although, for the particular application it
>> may be after the 'startup phase'.
>>
>>> It is the sharing of the of huge page shared
>>> memory that is causing problem. Of course, it depends on how the
>>> application is written.
>> It may be the case that some applications would find the delays acceptable
>> for the benefit of shared pmds once they reach steady state. As you say, of
>> course this depends on how the application is written.
>>
>> I know that Oracle DB would not like it if PMD sharing is disabled for them.
>> Based on what I know of their model, all processes which share PMDs perform
>> faults (write or read) during the startup phase. This is in environments as
>> big or bigger than you describe above. I have never looked at/for delays in
>> these environments around pmd sharing (page faults), but that does not mean
>> they do not exist. I will try to get the DB group to give me access to one
>> of their large environments for analysis.
>>
>> We may want to consider making the timeout value and disable threshold user
>> configurable.
>
> Making it configurable is certainly doable. They can be sysctl
> parameters so that the users can reenable PMD sharing by making those
> parameters larger.
It could be a Kconfig option, so people don’t need to change the setting every time
after reinstalling the system. There are times people don’t care too much
about those random multi-second delays. For example, running a debug kernel.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-11 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-11 15:05 [PATCH 0/5] hugetlbfs: Disable PMD sharing for large systems Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] locking/rwsem: Add down_write_timedlock() Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] locking/rwsem: Enable timeout check when spinning on owner Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] locking/osq: Allow early break from OSQ Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] locking/rwsem: Enable timeout check when staying in the OSQ Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] hugetlbfs: Limit wait time when trying to share huge PMD Waiman Long
2019-09-11 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-09-11 15:44 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 17:03 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-09-11 17:15 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 17:22 ` Qian Cai [this message]
2019-09-11 17:28 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 16:01 ` Qian Cai
2019-09-11 16:34 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 19:42 ` Qian Cai
2019-09-11 20:54 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-11 21:57 ` Qian Cai
2019-09-11 19:57 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-09-11 20:51 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-12 3:26 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-09-12 3:41 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-09-12 4:40 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-09-16 13:53 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-12 9:06 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-12 16:43 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-09-13 18:23 ` Waiman Long
2019-09-13 1:50 ` [PATCH 0/5] hugetlbfs: Disable PMD sharing for large systems Dave Chinner
2019-09-25 8:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=C29A1EFA-148C-454E-91F1-93D5116FB640@lca.pw \
--to=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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).