netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: qianjun.kernel@gmail.com
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, kafai@fb.com,
	songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, andriin@fb.com,
	john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@chromium.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/1] mm:improve the performance during fork
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 22:44:06 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210330224406.5e195f3b8b971ff2a56c657d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210329123635.56915-1-qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>

On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:36:35 +0800 qianjun.kernel@gmail.com wrote:

> From: jun qian <qianjun.kernel@gmail.com>
> 
> In our project, Many business delays come from fork, so
> we started looking for the reason why fork is time-consuming.
> I used the ftrace with function_graph to trace the fork, found
> that the vm_normal_page will be called tens of thousands and
> the execution time of this vm_normal_page function is only a
> few nanoseconds. And the vm_normal_page is not a inline function.
> So I think if the function is inline style, it maybe reduce the
> call time overhead.
> 
> I did the following experiment:
> 
> use the bpftrace tool to trace the fork time :
> 
> bpftrace -e 'kprobe:_do_fork/comm=="redis-server"/ {@st=nsecs;} \
> kretprobe:_do_fork /comm=="redis-server"/{printf("the fork time \
> is %d us\n", (nsecs-@st)/1000)}'
> 
> no inline vm_normal_page:
> result:
> the fork time is 40743 us
> the fork time is 41746 us
> the fork time is 41336 us
> the fork time is 42417 us
> the fork time is 40612 us
> the fork time is 40930 us
> the fork time is 41910 us
> 
> inline vm_normal_page:
> result:
> the fork time is 39276 us
> the fork time is 38974 us
> the fork time is 39436 us
> the fork time is 38815 us
> the fork time is 39878 us
> the fork time is 39176 us
> 
> In the same test environment, we can get 3% to 4% of
> performance improvement.
> 
> note:the test data is from the 4.18.0-193.6.3.el8_2.v1.1.x86_64,
> because my product use this version kernel to test the redis
> server, If you need to compare the latest version of the kernel
> test data, you can refer to the version 1 Patch.
> 
> We need to compare the changes in the size of vmlinux:
>                   inline           non-inline       diff
> vmlinux size      9709248 bytes    9709824 bytes    -576 bytes
> 

I get very different results with gcc-7.2.0:

q:/usr/src/25> size mm/memory.o
   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
  74898    3375      64   78337   13201 mm/memory.o-before
  75119    3363      64   78546   132d2 mm/memory.o-after

That's a somewhat significant increase in code size, and larger code
size has a worsened cache footprint.

Not that this is necessarily a bad thing for a function which is
tightly called many times in succession as is vm__normal_page()

> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -592,7 +592,7 @@ static void print_bad_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
>   * PFNMAP mappings in order to support COWable mappings.
>   *
>   */
> -struct page *vm_normal_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> +inline struct page *vm_normal_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
>  			    pte_t pte)
>  {
>  	unsigned long pfn = pte_pfn(pte);

I'm a bit surprised this made any difference - rumour has it that
modern gcc just ignores `inline' and makes up its own mind.  Which is
why we added __always_inline.


  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-31  5:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-29 12:36 [PATCH V2 1/1] mm:improve the performance during fork qianjun.kernel
2021-03-31  5:44 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2021-03-31 12:11   ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-03-31 14:42     ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-04-06  2:14   ` jun qian

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=20210330224406.5e195f3b8b971ff2a56c657d@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andriin@fb.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qianjun.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.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).