netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, 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: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 14:11:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9f012469-ccda-2c95-aa5a-7ca4f6fb2891@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210330224406.5e195f3b8b971ff2a56c657d@linux-foundation.org>

On 3/31/21 7:44 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 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

I got this:

./scripts/bloat-o-meter memory.o.before mm/memory.o
add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 1/3 up/down: 285/-86 (199)
Function                                     old     new   delta
copy_pte_range                              2095    2380    +285
vm_normal_page                               168     163      -5
do_anonymous_page                           1039    1003     -36
do_swap_page                                1835    1790     -45
Total: Before=42411, After=42610, chg +0.47%


> 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()

Hm but the inline only affects the users within mm/memory.c, unless the kernel
is built with link time optimization (LTO), which is not AFAIK not the standard yet.

>> --- 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.

AFAIK it doesn't completely ignore it, just takes it as a hint in addition to
its own heuristics. So adding the keyword might flip the decision to inline in
some cases, but is not guaranteed to.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-31 12:11 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
2021-03-31 12:11   ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
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=9f012469-ccda-2c95-aa5a-7ca4f6fb2891@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=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).