From: Hou Tao <houtao@huaweicloud.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, houtao1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v2 1/4] selftests/bpf: Add benchmark for bpf memory allocator
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:16:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a1880e4b-8659-7480-6260-61f30dd393cd@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230427042049.a6knzkteidm2dfm3@dhcp-172-26-102-232.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Hi,
On 4/27/2023 12:20 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 09:55:24AM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
>>>> ./bench htab-mem --use-case $name --max-entries 16384 \
>>>> --full 50 -d 7 -w 3 --producers=8 --prod-affinity=0-7
>>>>
>>>> | name | loop (k/s) | average memory (MiB) | peak memory (MiB) |
>>>> | -- | -- | -- | -- |
>>>> | no_op | 1129 | 1.15 | 1.15 |
>>>> | overwrite | 24.37 | 2.07 | 2.97 |
>>>> | batch_add_batch_del | 10.58 | 2.91 | 3.36 |
>>>> | add_del_on_diff_cpu | 13.14 | 380.66 | 633.99 |
>>> large mem for diff_cpu case needs to be investigated.
>> The main reason is that tasks-trace RCU GP is slow and there is only one
>> inflight free callback, so the CPUs which only do element addition will allocate
>> new memory from slab continuously and the CPUs which only do element deletion
>> will free these elements continuously through call_tasks_trace_rcu(), but due to
>> the slowness of tasks-trace RCU GP, these freed elements could not be freed back
>> to slab subsystem timely.
> I see. Now it makes sense. It's slow call_tasks_trace_rcu and not at all "memory can never be reused."
> Please explain things clearly in commit log.
Will fix the commit message.
>
>>>> +{
>>>> + __u64 *value;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (ctx->from >= ctx->max)
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> +
>>>> + value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&array, &ctx->from);
>>>> + if (value)
>>>> + bpf_map_update_elem(&htab, &ctx->from, value, flags);
>>> What is a point of doing lookup from giant array of en element with zero value
>>> to copy it into htab?
>>> Why not to use single zero inited elem for all htab ops?
>> I want to check how does the different size of value effect the benchmark
>> result, so I choose a variable-size value.
> Not following. All elements of the array have the same size.
> Are you saying you were not able to figure out how to supply a single 'value'
> of variable size? Try array of max_entries=1.
> Do not do unnecessary and confusing bpf_map_lookup_elem(&array, &ctx->from);.
My bad. I misunderstood your meaning. Yes, even though the value size is
variable, but using an array with only one element is enough for this
benchmark.
>
>>> Each loop will run 16k times and every time you step += 4.
>>> So 3/4 of these 16k runs it will be hitting if (ctx->from >= ctx->max) condition.
>>> What are you measuring?
>> As explained in the commit message, I am trying to let different deletion and
>> deletion CPU pairs operate on the different subsets of hash-table elements.
>> Assuming there are 16 elements in the htab and there are 8 CPUs and 8 threads,
>> the following is the operation subset for each CPU:
>>
>> CPU 0: 0 4 8 12 (do deletion)
>> CPU 1: 0 4 8 12 (do addition)
>>
>> CPU 2: 1 5 9 13
>> CPU 3: 1 5 9 13
>>
>> CPU 4: 2 6 10 14
>> CPU 5: 2 6 10 14
>>
>> CPU 6: 3 7 11 15
>> CPU 7: 3 7 11 15
> That part is clear, but
>
>>>> + __sync_fetch_and_add(&loop_cnt, 1);
> this doesn't match the rest. loop_cnt is inremented 4 times faster.
> So it's not comparable to other tests.
In the previous two cases, loop_cnt is increased when nr_entries /
nr_thread elements are deleted and then added (or opposite). For
add_del_on_diff_cpu case, loop_cnt will be increased twice when
nr_entries / nr_thread * 2 are added and then deleted. So I think the
result is roughly comparable to other tests.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-28 2:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-08 14:18 [RFC bpf-next v2 0/4] Introduce BPF_MA_REUSE_AFTER_RCU_GP Hou Tao
2023-04-08 14:18 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 1/4] selftests/bpf: Add benchmark for bpf memory allocator Hou Tao
2023-04-22 2:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-04-23 1:55 ` Hou Tao
2023-04-27 4:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-04-27 13:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-04-28 6:13 ` Hou Tao
2023-04-28 2:16 ` Hou Tao [this message]
2023-04-23 8:03 ` Hou Tao
2023-04-08 14:18 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 2/4] bpf: Factor out a common helper free_all() Hou Tao
2023-04-08 14:18 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 3/4] bpf: Pass bitwise flags to bpf_mem_alloc_init() Hou Tao
2023-04-08 14:18 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 4/4] bpf: Introduce BPF_MA_REUSE_AFTER_RCU_GP Hou Tao
2023-04-22 3:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-04-23 7:41 ` Hou Tao
2023-04-27 4:24 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-04-28 2:24 ` Hou Tao
2023-04-21 6:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 0/4] " Hou Tao
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=a1880e4b-8659-7480-6260-61f30dd393cd@huaweicloud.com \
--to=houtao@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--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).