License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license identifier to files with no license
Many source files in the tree are missing licensing information, which
makes it harder for compliance tools to determine the correct license.
By default all files without license information are under the default
license of the kernel, which is GPL version 2.
Update the files which contain no license information with the 'GPL-2.0'
SPDX license identifier. The SPDX identifier is a legally binding
shorthand, which can be used instead of the full boiler plate text.
This patch is based on work done by Thomas Gleixner and Kate Stewart and
Philippe Ombredanne.
How this work was done:
Patches were generated and checked against linux-4.14-rc6 for a subset of
the use cases:
- file had no licensing information it it.
- file was a */uapi/* one with no licensing information in it,
- file was a */uapi/* one with existing licensing information,
Further patches will be generated in subsequent months to fix up cases
where non-standard license headers were used, and references to license
had to be inferred by heuristics based on keywords.
The analysis to determine which SPDX License Identifier to be applied to
a file was done in a spreadsheet of side by side results from of the
output of two independent scanners (ScanCode & Windriver) producing SPDX
tag:value files created by Philippe Ombredanne. Philippe prepared the
base worksheet, and did an initial spot review of a few 1000 files.
The 4.13 kernel was the starting point of the analysis with 60,537 files
assessed. Kate Stewart did a file by file comparison of the scanner
results in the spreadsheet to determine which SPDX license identifier(s)
to be applied to the file. She confirmed any determination that was not
immediately clear with lawyers working with the Linux Foundation.
Criteria used to select files for SPDX license identifier tagging was:
- Files considered eligible had to be source code files.
- Make and config files were included as candidates if they contained >5
lines of source
- File already had some variant of a license header in it (even if <5
lines).
All documentation files were explicitly excluded.
The following heuristics were used to determine which SPDX license
identifiers to apply.
- when both scanners couldn't find any license traces, file was
considered to have no license information in it, and the top level
COPYING file license applied.
For non */uapi/* files that summary was:
SPDX license identifier # files
---------------------------------------------------|-------
GPL-2.0 11139
and resulted in the first patch in this series.
If that file was a */uapi/* path one, it was "GPL-2.0 WITH
Linux-syscall-note" otherwise it was "GPL-2.0". Results of that was:
SPDX license identifier # files
---------------------------------------------------|-------
GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note 930
and resulted in the second patch in this series.
- if a file had some form of licensing information in it, and was one
of the */uapi/* ones, it was denoted with the Linux-syscall-note if
any GPL family license was found in the file or had no licensing in
it (per prior point). Results summary:
SPDX license identifier # files
---------------------------------------------------|------
GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note 270
GPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 169
((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-2-Clause) 21
((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-3-Clause) 17
LGPL-2.1+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 15
GPL-1.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 14
((GPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-3-Clause) 5
LGPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 4
LGPL-2.1 WITH Linux-syscall-note 3
((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR MIT) 3
((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) AND MIT) 1
and that resulted in the third patch in this series.
- when the two scanners agreed on the detected license(s), that became
the concluded license(s).
- when there was disagreement between the two scanners (one detected a
license but the other didn't, or they both detected different
licenses) a manual inspection of the file occurred.
- In most cases a manual inspection of the information in the file
resulted in a clear resolution of the license that should apply (and
which scanner probably needed to revisit its heuristics).
- When it was not immediately clear, the license identifier was
confirmed with lawyers working with the Linux Foundation.
- If there was any question as to the appropriate license identifier,
the file was flagged for further research and to be revisited later
in time.
In total, over 70 hours of logged manual review was done on the
spreadsheet to determine the SPDX license identifiers to apply to the
source files by Kate, Philippe, Thomas and, in some cases, confirmation
by lawyers working with the Linux Foundation.
Kate also obtained a third independent scan of the 4.13 code base from
FOSSology, and compared selected files where the other two scanners
disagreed against that SPDX file, to see if there was new insights. The
Windriver scanner is based on an older version of FOSSology in part, so
they are related.
Thomas did random spot checks in about 500 files from the spreadsheets
for the uapi headers and agreed with SPDX license identifier in the
files he inspected. For the non-uapi files Thomas did random spot checks
in about 15000 files.
In initial set of patches against 4.14-rc6, 3 files were found to have
copy/paste license identifier errors, and have been fixed to reflect the
correct identifier.
Additionally Philippe spent 10 hours this week doing a detailed manual
inspection and review of the 12,461 patched files from the initial patch
version early this week with:
- a full scancode scan run, collecting the matched texts, detected
license ids and scores
- reviewing anything where there was a license detected (about 500+
files) to ensure that the applied SPDX license was correct
- reviewing anything where there was no detection but the patch license
was not GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note to ensure that the applied
SPDX license was correct
This produced a worksheet with 20 files needing minor correction. This
worksheet was then exported into 3 different .csv files for the
different types of files to be modified.
These .csv files were then reviewed by Greg. Thomas wrote a script to
parse the csv files and add the proper SPDX tag to the file, in the
format that the file expected. This script was further refined by Greg
based on the output to detect more types of files automatically and to
distinguish between header and source .c files (which need different
comment types.) Finally Greg ran the script using the .csv files to
generate the patches.
Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-11-01 22:07:57 +08:00
|
|
|
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
|
2006-06-30 16:55:32 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifndef _LINUX_VMSTAT_H
|
|
|
|
|
#define _LINUX_VMSTAT_H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/types.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/percpu.h>
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/mmzone.h>
|
2011-05-27 07:25:24 +08:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/vm_event_item.h>
|
2011-07-27 07:09:06 +08:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/atomic.h>
|
2017-11-16 09:38:22 +08:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/static_key.h>
|
2006-06-30 16:55:32 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-24 12:27:03 +08:00
|
|
|
extern int sysctl_stat_interval;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-11-16 09:38:22 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
|
|
|
|
|
#define ENABLE_NUMA_STAT 1
|
|
|
|
|
#define DISABLE_NUMA_STAT 0
|
|
|
|
|
extern int sysctl_vm_numa_stat;
|
|
|
|
|
DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_TRUE(vm_numa_stat_key);
|
|
|
|
|
extern int sysctl_vm_numa_stat_handler(struct ctl_table *table,
|
|
|
|
|
int write, void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos);
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-10 17:44:41 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_VM_EVENT_COUNTERS
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* Light weight per cpu counter implementation.
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
* Counters should only be incremented and no critical kernel component
|
|
|
|
|
* should rely on the counter values.
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
* Counters are handled completely inline. On many platforms the code
|
|
|
|
|
* generated will simply be the increment of a global address.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
struct vm_event_state {
|
|
|
|
|
unsigned long event[NR_VM_EVENT_ITEMS];
|
2006-06-30 16:55:32 +08:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct vm_event_state, vm_event_states);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-08 06:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* vm counters are allowed to be racy. Use raw_cpu_ops to avoid the
|
|
|
|
|
* local_irq_disable overhead.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2014-04-08 06:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
raw_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2009-10-29 21:34:15 +08:00
|
|
|
this_cpu_inc(vm_event_states.event[item]);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2014-04-08 06:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
raw_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2009-10-29 21:34:15 +08:00
|
|
|
this_cpu_add(vm_event_states.event[item], delta);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
extern void all_vm_events(unsigned long *);
|
2013-04-30 06:08:14 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void vm_events_fold_cpu(int cpu);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Disable counters */
|
2007-02-10 17:44:41 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __count_vm_event(enum vm_event_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __count_vm_events(enum vm_event_item item, long delta)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void all_vm_events(unsigned long *ret)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void vm_events_fold_cpu(int cpu)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-06-30 16:55:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_VM_EVENT_COUNTERS */
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-11-02 22:52:48 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_numa_event(x) count_vm_event(x)
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_numa_events(x, y) count_vm_events(x, y)
|
|
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_numa_event(x) do {} while (0)
|
2013-02-23 08:34:29 +08:00
|
|
|
#define count_vm_numa_events(x, y) do { (void)(y); } while (0)
|
2012-11-02 22:52:48 +08:00
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING */
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014-01-22 06:33:16 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_TLBFLUSH
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_tlb_event(x) count_vm_event(x)
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_tlb_events(x, y) count_vm_events(x, y)
|
|
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_tlb_event(x) do {} while (0)
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_tlb_events(x, y) do { (void)(y); } while (0)
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014-06-05 07:06:46 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_VMACACHE
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_vmacache_event(x) count_vm_event(x)
|
|
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
|
#define count_vm_vmacache_event(x) do {} while (0)
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016-07-29 06:46:56 +08:00
|
|
|
#define __count_zid_vm_events(item, zid, delta) \
|
|
|
|
|
__count_vm_events(item##_NORMAL - ZONE_NORMAL + zid, delta)
|
2006-06-30 16:55:32 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
* Zone and node-based page accounting with per cpu differentials.
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
*/
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern atomic_long_t vm_zone_stat[NR_VM_ZONE_STAT_ITEMS];
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
extern atomic_long_t vm_numa_stat[NR_VM_NUMA_STAT_ITEMS];
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern atomic_long_t vm_node_stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS];
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void zone_numa_state_add(long x, struct zone *zone,
|
|
|
|
|
enum numa_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &zone->vm_numa_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &vm_numa_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long global_numa_state(enum numa_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&vm_numa_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-09 07:12:55 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long zone_numa_state_snapshot(struct zone *zone,
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
enum numa_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&zone->vm_numa_stat[item]);
|
2017-09-09 07:12:55 +08:00
|
|
|
int cpu;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
|
|
|
|
|
x += per_cpu_ptr(zone->pageset, cpu)->vm_numa_stat_diff[item];
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void zone_page_state_add(long x, struct zone *zone,
|
|
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &zone->vm_stat[item]);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &vm_zone_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void node_page_state_add(long x, struct pglist_data *pgdat,
|
|
|
|
|
enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &pgdat->vm_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_add(x, &vm_node_stat[item]);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-07 07:23:36 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long global_zone_page_state(enum zone_stat_item item)
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&vm_zone_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
|
|
|
|
if (x < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
x = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long global_node_page_state(enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&vm_node_stat[item]);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
|
|
|
|
if (x < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
x = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long zone_page_state(struct zone *zone,
|
|
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&zone->vm_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
|
|
|
|
if (x < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
x = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-09-10 07:38:17 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* More accurate version that also considers the currently pending
|
|
|
|
|
* deltas. For that we need to loop over all cpus to find the current
|
|
|
|
|
* deltas. There is no synchronization so the result cannot be
|
|
|
|
|
* exactly accurate either.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
static inline unsigned long zone_page_state_snapshot(struct zone *zone,
|
|
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
long x = atomic_long_read(&zone->vm_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
|
|
|
|
int cpu;
|
|
|
|
|
for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
|
|
|
|
|
x += per_cpu_ptr(zone->pageset, cpu)->vm_stat_diff[item];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (x < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
x = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void __inc_numa_state(struct zone *zone, enum numa_stat_item item);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern unsigned long sum_zone_node_page_state(int node,
|
mm: change the call sites of numa statistics items
Patch series "Separate NUMA statistics from zone statistics", v2.
Each page allocation updates a set of per-zone statistics with a call to
zone_statistics(). As discussed in 2017 MM summit, these are a
substantial source of overhead in the page allocator and are very rarely
consumed. This significant overhead in cache bouncing caused by zone
counters (NUMA associated counters) update in parallel in multi-threaded
page allocation (pointed out by Dave Hansen).
A link to the MM summit slides:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/presentations/MM-summit2017/MM-summit2017-JesperBrouer.pdf
To mitigate this overhead, this patchset separates NUMA statistics from
zone statistics framework, and update NUMA counter threshold to a fixed
size of MAX_U16 - 2, as a small threshold greatly increases the update
frequency of the global counter from local per cpu counter (suggested by
Ying Huang). The rationality is that these statistics counters don't
need to be read often, unlike other VM counters, so it's not a problem
to use a large threshold and make readers more expensive.
With this patchset, we see 31.3% drop of CPU cycles(537-->369, see
below) for per single page allocation and reclaim on Jesper's
page_bench03 benchmark. Meanwhile, this patchset keeps the same style
of virtual memory statistics with little end-user-visible effects (only
move the numa stats to show behind zone page stats, see the first patch
for details).
I did an experiment of single page allocation and reclaim concurrently
using Jesper's page_bench03 benchmark on a 2-Socket Broadwell-based
server (88 processors with 126G memory) with different size of threshold
of pcp counter.
Benchmark provided by Jesper D Brouer(increase loop times to 10000000):
https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/tree/master/kernel/mm/bench
Threshold CPU cycles Throughput(88 threads)
32 799 241760478
64 640 301628829
125 537 358906028 <==> system by default
256 468 412397590
512 428 450550704
4096 399 482520943
20000 394 489009617
30000 395 488017817
65533 369(-31.3%) 521661345(+45.3%) <==> with this patchset
N/A 342(-36.3%) 562900157(+56.8%) <==> disable zone_statistics
This patch (of 3):
In this patch, NUMA statistics is separated from zone statistics
framework, all the call sites of NUMA stats are changed to use
numa-stats-specific functions, it does not have any functionality change
except that the number of NUMA stats is shown behind zone page stats
when users *read* the zone info.
E.g. cat /proc/zoneinfo
***Base*** ***With this patch***
nr_free_pages 3976 nr_free_pages 3976
nr_zone_inactive_anon 0 nr_zone_inactive_anon 0
nr_zone_active_anon 0 nr_zone_active_anon 0
nr_zone_inactive_file 0 nr_zone_inactive_file 0
nr_zone_active_file 0 nr_zone_active_file 0
nr_zone_unevictable 0 nr_zone_unevictable 0
nr_zone_write_pending 0 nr_zone_write_pending 0
nr_mlock 0 nr_mlock 0
nr_page_table_pages 0 nr_page_table_pages 0
nr_kernel_stack 0 nr_kernel_stack 0
nr_bounce 0 nr_bounce 0
nr_zspages 0 nr_zspages 0
numa_hit 0 *nr_free_cma 0*
numa_miss 0 numa_hit 0
numa_foreign 0 numa_miss 0
numa_interleave 0 numa_foreign 0
numa_local 0 numa_interleave 0
numa_other 0 numa_local 0
*nr_free_cma 0* numa_other 0
... ...
vm stats threshold: 10 vm stats threshold: 10
... ...
The next patch updates the numa stats counter size and threshold.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1503568801-21305-2-git-send-email-kemi.wang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>
Reported-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@intel.com>
Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-09 07:12:48 +08:00
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item);
|
|
|
|
|
extern unsigned long sum_zone_numa_state(int node, enum numa_stat_item item);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern unsigned long node_page_state(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
|
|
|
|
|
enum node_stat_item item);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
#else
|
2017-09-07 07:23:36 +08:00
|
|
|
#define sum_zone_node_page_state(node, item) global_zone_page_state(item)
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
#define node_page_state(node, item) global_node_page_state(item)
|
2006-06-30 16:55:44 +08:00
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA */
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#define add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d) mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
|
|
|
|
|
#define sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d) mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, -(__d))
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
#define add_node_page_state(__p, __i, __d) mod_node_page_state(__p, __i, __d)
|
|
|
|
|
#define sub_node_page_state(__p, __i, __d) mod_node_page_state(__p, __i, -(__d))
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
|
2015-12-30 06:54:32 +08:00
|
|
|
void __mod_zone_page_state(struct zone *, enum zone_stat_item item, long);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
void __inc_zone_page_state(struct page *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
void __dec_zone_page_state(struct page *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:32 +08:00
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
void __mod_node_page_state(struct pglist_data *, enum node_stat_item item, long);
|
|
|
|
|
void __inc_node_page_state(struct page *, enum node_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
void __dec_node_page_state(struct page *, enum node_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-12-30 06:54:32 +08:00
|
|
|
void mod_zone_page_state(struct zone *, enum zone_stat_item, long);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
void inc_zone_page_state(struct page *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
void dec_zone_page_state(struct page *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
void mod_node_page_state(struct pglist_data *, enum node_stat_item, long);
|
|
|
|
|
void inc_node_page_state(struct page *, enum node_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
void dec_node_page_state(struct page *, enum node_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
extern void inc_node_state(struct pglist_data *, enum node_stat_item);
|
2007-02-10 17:43:01 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void __inc_zone_state(struct zone *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void __inc_node_state(struct pglist_data *, enum node_stat_item);
|
2007-02-10 17:43:01 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void dec_zone_state(struct zone *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
|
|
|
|
extern void __dec_zone_state(struct zone *, enum zone_stat_item);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
extern void __dec_node_state(struct pglist_data *, enum node_stat_item);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2016-01-15 07:21:40 +08:00
|
|
|
void quiet_vmstat(void);
|
2013-09-12 05:21:30 +08:00
|
|
|
void cpu_vm_stats_fold(int cpu);
|
2011-05-25 08:11:33 +08:00
|
|
|
void refresh_zone_stat_thresholds(void);
|
2011-01-14 07:45:43 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2016-05-20 08:12:50 +08:00
|
|
|
struct ctl_table;
|
|
|
|
|
int vmstat_refresh(struct ctl_table *, int write,
|
|
|
|
|
void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-10-09 07:33:39 +08:00
|
|
|
void drain_zonestat(struct zone *zone, struct per_cpu_pageset *);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-01-14 07:45:43 +08:00
|
|
|
int calculate_pressure_threshold(struct zone *zone);
|
|
|
|
|
int calculate_normal_threshold(struct zone *zone);
|
|
|
|
|
void set_pgdat_percpu_threshold(pg_data_t *pgdat,
|
|
|
|
|
int (*calculate_pressure)(struct zone *));
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
#else /* CONFIG_SMP */
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* We do not maintain differentials in a single processor configuration.
|
|
|
|
|
* The functions directly modify the zone and global counters.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __mod_zone_page_state(struct zone *zone,
|
2015-12-30 06:54:32 +08:00
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item, long delta)
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
zone_page_state_add(delta, zone, item);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __mod_node_page_state(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
|
|
|
|
|
enum node_stat_item item, int delta)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
node_page_state_add(delta, pgdat, item);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-07-10 19:44:30 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __inc_zone_state(struct zone *zone, enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_inc(&zone->vm_stat[item]);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
atomic_long_inc(&vm_zone_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __inc_node_state(struct pglist_data *pgdat, enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_inc(&pgdat->vm_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_inc(&vm_node_stat[item]);
|
2006-07-10 19:44:30 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-10 17:43:01 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __dec_zone_state(struct zone *zone, enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_dec(&zone->vm_stat[item]);
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
atomic_long_dec(&vm_zone_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline void __dec_node_state(struct pglist_data *pgdat, enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_dec(&pgdat->vm_stat[item]);
|
|
|
|
|
atomic_long_dec(&vm_node_stat[item]);
|
2007-02-10 17:43:01 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm: vmstat: fix UP zone state accounting
Summary:
The VM maintains cached filesystem pages on two types of lists. One
list holds the pages recently faulted into the cache, the other list
holds pages that have been referenced repeatedly on that first list.
The idea is to prefer reclaiming young pages over those that have shown
to benefit from caching in the past. We call the recently used list
"inactive list" and the frequently used list "active list".
Currently, the VM aims for a 1:1 ratio between the lists, which is the
"perfect" trade-off between the ability to *protect* frequently used
pages and the ability to *detect* frequently used pages. This means
that working set changes bigger than half of cache memory go undetected
and thrash indefinitely, whereas working sets bigger than half of cache
memory are unprotected against used-once streams that don't even need
caching.
This happens on file servers and media streaming servers, where the
popular files and file sections change over time. Even though the
individual files might be smaller than half of memory, concurrent access
to many of them may still result in their inter-reference distance being
greater than half of memory. It's also been reported as a problem on
database workloads that switch back and forth between tables that are
bigger than half of memory. In these cases the VM never recognizes the
new working set and will for the remainder of the workload thrash disk
data which could easily live in memory.
Historically, every reclaim scan of the inactive list also took a
smaller number of pages from the tail of the active list and moved them
to the head of the inactive list. This model gave established working
sets more gracetime in the face of temporary use-once streams, but
ultimately was not significantly better than a FIFO policy and still
thrashed cache based on eviction speed, rather than actual demand for
cache.
This series solves the problem by maintaining a history of pages evicted
from the inactive list, enabling the VM to detect frequently used pages
regardless of inactive list size and facilitate working set transitions.
Tests:
The reported database workload is easily demonstrated on a 8G machine
with two filesets a 6G. This fio workload operates on one set first,
then switches to the other. The VM should obviously always cache the
set that the workload is currently using.
This test is based on a problem encountered by Citus Data customers:
http://citusdata.com/blog/72-linux-memory-manager-and-your-big-data
unpatched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=885559KB/s, minb=885559KB/s, maxb=885559KB/s, mint= 113672msec, maxt= 113672msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb= 66169KB/s, minb= 66169KB/s, maxb= 66169KB/s, mint=1521302msec, maxt=1521302msec
sdb: ios=835750/4, merge=2/1, ticks=4659739/60016, in_queue=4719203, util=98.92%
real 27m15.541s
user 0m19.059s
sys 0m51.459s
patched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=877783KB/s, minb=877783KB/s, maxb=877783KB/s, mint=114679msec, maxt=114679msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=397449KB/s, minb=397449KB/s, maxb=397449KB/s, mint=253273msec, maxt=253273msec
sdb: ios=170587/4, merge=2/1, ticks=954910/61123, in_queue=1015923, util=90.40%
real 6m8.630s
user 0m14.714s
sys 0m31.233s
As can be seen, the unpatched kernel simply never adapts to the
workingset change and db2 is stuck indefinitely with secondary storage
speed. The patched kernel needs 2-3 iterations over db2 before it
replaces db1 and reaches full memory speed. Given the unbounded
negative affect of the existing VM behavior, these patches should be
considered correctness fixes rather than performance optimizations.
Another test resembles a fileserver or streaming server workload, where
data in excess of memory size is accessed at different frequencies.
There is very hot data accessed at a high frequency. Machines should be
fitted so that the hot set of such a workload can be fully cached or all
bets are off. Then there is a very big (compared to available memory)
set of data that is used-once or at a very low frequency; this is what
drives the inactive list and does not really benefit from caching.
Lastly, there is a big set of warm data in between that is accessed at
medium frequencies and benefits from caching the pages between the first
and last streamer of each burst.
unpatched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160693KB/s, minb=160693KB/s, maxb=160693KB/s, mint=815665msec, maxt=815665msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=109853KB/s, minb= 27463KB/s, maxb= 29244KB/s, mint=717110msec, maxt=763617msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 35245KB/s, minb= 35245KB/s, maxb= 35245KB/s, mint=892530msec, maxt=892530msec
sdb: ios=797960/4, merge=11763/1, ticks=4307910/796, in_queue=4308380, util=100.00%
patched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160678KB/s, minb=160678KB/s, maxb=160678KB/s, mint=815740msec, maxt=815740msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=147747KB/s, minb= 36936KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=512000msec, maxt=567767msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 40960KB/s, minb= 40960KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=768000msec, maxt=768000msec
sdb: ios=596514/4, merge=9341/1, ticks=2395362/997, in_queue=2396484, util=79.18%
In both kernels, the hot set is propagated to the active list and then
served from cache.
In both kernels, the beginning of the warm set is propagated to the
active list as well, but in the unpatched case the active list
eventually takes up half of memory and no new pages from the warm set
get activated, despite repeated access, and despite most of the active
list soon being stale. The patched kernel on the other hand detects the
thrashing and manages to keep this cache window rolling through the data
set. This frees up enough IO bandwidth that the cold set is served at
full speed as well and disk utilization even drops by 20%.
For reference, this same test was performed with the traditional
demotion mechanism, where deactivation is coupled to inactive list
reclaim. However, this had the same outcome as the unpatched kernel:
while the warm set does indeed get activated continuously, it is forced
out of the active list by inactive list pressure, which is dictated
primarily by the unrelated cold set. The warm set is evicted before
subsequent streamers can benefit from it, even though there would be
enough space available to cache the pages of interest.
Costs:
Page reclaim used to shrink the radix trees but now the tree nodes are
reused for shadow entries, where the cost depends heavily on the page
cache access patterns. However, with workloads that maintain spatial or
temporal locality, the shadow entries are either refaulted quickly or
reclaimed along with the inode object itself. Workloads that will
experience a memory cost increase are those that don't really benefit
from caching in the first place.
A more predictable alternative would be a fixed-cost separate pool of
shadow entries, but this would incur relatively higher memory cost for
well-behaved workloads at the benefit of cornercases. It would also
make the shadow entry lookup more costly compared to storing them
directly in the cache structure.
Future:
To simplify the merging process, this patch set is implementing thrash
detection on a global per-zone level only for now, but the design is
such that it can be extended to memory cgroups as well. All we need to
do is store the unique cgroup ID along the node and zone identifier
inside the eviction cookie to identify the lruvec.
Right now we have a fixed ratio (50:50) between inactive and active list
but we already have complaints about working sets exceeding half of
memory being pushed out of the cache by simple streaming in the
background. Ultimately, we want to adjust this ratio and allow for a
much smaller inactive list. These patches are an essential step in this
direction because they decouple the VMs ability to detect working set
changes from the inactive list size. This would allow us to base the
inactive list size on the combined readahead window size for example and
potentially protect a much bigger working set.
It's also a big step towards activating pages with a reuse distance
larger than memory, as long as they are the most frequently used pages
in the workload. This will require knowing more about the access
frequency of active pages than what we measure right now, so it's also
deferred in this series.
Another possibility of having thrashing information would be to revisit
the idea of local reclaim in the form of zero-config memory control
groups. Instead of having allocating tasks go straight to global
reclaim, they could try to reclaim the pages in the memcg they are part
of first as long as the group is not thrashing. This would allow a user
to drop e.g. a back-up job in an otherwise unconfigured memcg and it
would only inflate (and possibly do global reclaim) until it has enough
memory to do proper readahead. But once it reaches that point and stops
thrashing it would just recycle its own used-once pages without kicking
out the cache of any other tasks in the system more than necessary.
This patch (of 10):
Fengguang Wu's build testing spotted problems with inc_zone_state() and
dec_zone_state() on UP configurations in out-of-tree patches.
inc_zone_state() is declared but not defined, dec_zone_state() is
missing entirely.
Just like with *_zone_page_state(), they can be defined like their
preemption-unsafe counterparts on UP.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: make it build]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Metin Doslu <metin@citusdata.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun@citusdata.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-04 05:47:34 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __inc_zone_page_state(struct page *page,
|
|
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
__inc_zone_state(page_zone(page), item);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __inc_node_page_state(struct page *page,
|
|
|
|
|
enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
__inc_node_state(page_pgdat(page), item);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __dec_zone_page_state(struct page *page,
|
|
|
|
|
enum zone_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2008-02-25 23:45:03 +08:00
|
|
|
__dec_zone_state(page_zone(page), item);
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __dec_node_page_state(struct page *page,
|
|
|
|
|
enum node_stat_item item)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
__dec_node_state(page_pgdat(page), item);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* We only use atomic operations to update counters. So there is no need to
|
|
|
|
|
* disable interrupts.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
#define inc_zone_page_state __inc_zone_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
#define dec_zone_page_state __dec_zone_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
#define mod_zone_page_state __mod_zone_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
#define inc_node_page_state __inc_node_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
#define dec_node_page_state __dec_node_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
#define mod_node_page_state __mod_node_page_state
|
|
|
|
|
|
mm: vmstat: fix UP zone state accounting
Summary:
The VM maintains cached filesystem pages on two types of lists. One
list holds the pages recently faulted into the cache, the other list
holds pages that have been referenced repeatedly on that first list.
The idea is to prefer reclaiming young pages over those that have shown
to benefit from caching in the past. We call the recently used list
"inactive list" and the frequently used list "active list".
Currently, the VM aims for a 1:1 ratio between the lists, which is the
"perfect" trade-off between the ability to *protect* frequently used
pages and the ability to *detect* frequently used pages. This means
that working set changes bigger than half of cache memory go undetected
and thrash indefinitely, whereas working sets bigger than half of cache
memory are unprotected against used-once streams that don't even need
caching.
This happens on file servers and media streaming servers, where the
popular files and file sections change over time. Even though the
individual files might be smaller than half of memory, concurrent access
to many of them may still result in their inter-reference distance being
greater than half of memory. It's also been reported as a problem on
database workloads that switch back and forth between tables that are
bigger than half of memory. In these cases the VM never recognizes the
new working set and will for the remainder of the workload thrash disk
data which could easily live in memory.
Historically, every reclaim scan of the inactive list also took a
smaller number of pages from the tail of the active list and moved them
to the head of the inactive list. This model gave established working
sets more gracetime in the face of temporary use-once streams, but
ultimately was not significantly better than a FIFO policy and still
thrashed cache based on eviction speed, rather than actual demand for
cache.
This series solves the problem by maintaining a history of pages evicted
from the inactive list, enabling the VM to detect frequently used pages
regardless of inactive list size and facilitate working set transitions.
Tests:
The reported database workload is easily demonstrated on a 8G machine
with two filesets a 6G. This fio workload operates on one set first,
then switches to the other. The VM should obviously always cache the
set that the workload is currently using.
This test is based on a problem encountered by Citus Data customers:
http://citusdata.com/blog/72-linux-memory-manager-and-your-big-data
unpatched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=885559KB/s, minb=885559KB/s, maxb=885559KB/s, mint= 113672msec, maxt= 113672msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb= 66169KB/s, minb= 66169KB/s, maxb= 66169KB/s, mint=1521302msec, maxt=1521302msec
sdb: ios=835750/4, merge=2/1, ticks=4659739/60016, in_queue=4719203, util=98.92%
real 27m15.541s
user 0m19.059s
sys 0m51.459s
patched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=877783KB/s, minb=877783KB/s, maxb=877783KB/s, mint=114679msec, maxt=114679msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=397449KB/s, minb=397449KB/s, maxb=397449KB/s, mint=253273msec, maxt=253273msec
sdb: ios=170587/4, merge=2/1, ticks=954910/61123, in_queue=1015923, util=90.40%
real 6m8.630s
user 0m14.714s
sys 0m31.233s
As can be seen, the unpatched kernel simply never adapts to the
workingset change and db2 is stuck indefinitely with secondary storage
speed. The patched kernel needs 2-3 iterations over db2 before it
replaces db1 and reaches full memory speed. Given the unbounded
negative affect of the existing VM behavior, these patches should be
considered correctness fixes rather than performance optimizations.
Another test resembles a fileserver or streaming server workload, where
data in excess of memory size is accessed at different frequencies.
There is very hot data accessed at a high frequency. Machines should be
fitted so that the hot set of such a workload can be fully cached or all
bets are off. Then there is a very big (compared to available memory)
set of data that is used-once or at a very low frequency; this is what
drives the inactive list and does not really benefit from caching.
Lastly, there is a big set of warm data in between that is accessed at
medium frequencies and benefits from caching the pages between the first
and last streamer of each burst.
unpatched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160693KB/s, minb=160693KB/s, maxb=160693KB/s, mint=815665msec, maxt=815665msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=109853KB/s, minb= 27463KB/s, maxb= 29244KB/s, mint=717110msec, maxt=763617msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 35245KB/s, minb= 35245KB/s, maxb= 35245KB/s, mint=892530msec, maxt=892530msec
sdb: ios=797960/4, merge=11763/1, ticks=4307910/796, in_queue=4308380, util=100.00%
patched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160678KB/s, minb=160678KB/s, maxb=160678KB/s, mint=815740msec, maxt=815740msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=147747KB/s, minb= 36936KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=512000msec, maxt=567767msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 40960KB/s, minb= 40960KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=768000msec, maxt=768000msec
sdb: ios=596514/4, merge=9341/1, ticks=2395362/997, in_queue=2396484, util=79.18%
In both kernels, the hot set is propagated to the active list and then
served from cache.
In both kernels, the beginning of the warm set is propagated to the
active list as well, but in the unpatched case the active list
eventually takes up half of memory and no new pages from the warm set
get activated, despite repeated access, and despite most of the active
list soon being stale. The patched kernel on the other hand detects the
thrashing and manages to keep this cache window rolling through the data
set. This frees up enough IO bandwidth that the cold set is served at
full speed as well and disk utilization even drops by 20%.
For reference, this same test was performed with the traditional
demotion mechanism, where deactivation is coupled to inactive list
reclaim. However, this had the same outcome as the unpatched kernel:
while the warm set does indeed get activated continuously, it is forced
out of the active list by inactive list pressure, which is dictated
primarily by the unrelated cold set. The warm set is evicted before
subsequent streamers can benefit from it, even though there would be
enough space available to cache the pages of interest.
Costs:
Page reclaim used to shrink the radix trees but now the tree nodes are
reused for shadow entries, where the cost depends heavily on the page
cache access patterns. However, with workloads that maintain spatial or
temporal locality, the shadow entries are either refaulted quickly or
reclaimed along with the inode object itself. Workloads that will
experience a memory cost increase are those that don't really benefit
from caching in the first place.
A more predictable alternative would be a fixed-cost separate pool of
shadow entries, but this would incur relatively higher memory cost for
well-behaved workloads at the benefit of cornercases. It would also
make the shadow entry lookup more costly compared to storing them
directly in the cache structure.
Future:
To simplify the merging process, this patch set is implementing thrash
detection on a global per-zone level only for now, but the design is
such that it can be extended to memory cgroups as well. All we need to
do is store the unique cgroup ID along the node and zone identifier
inside the eviction cookie to identify the lruvec.
Right now we have a fixed ratio (50:50) between inactive and active list
but we already have complaints about working sets exceeding half of
memory being pushed out of the cache by simple streaming in the
background. Ultimately, we want to adjust this ratio and allow for a
much smaller inactive list. These patches are an essential step in this
direction because they decouple the VMs ability to detect working set
changes from the inactive list size. This would allow us to base the
inactive list size on the combined readahead window size for example and
potentially protect a much bigger working set.
It's also a big step towards activating pages with a reuse distance
larger than memory, as long as they are the most frequently used pages
in the workload. This will require knowing more about the access
frequency of active pages than what we measure right now, so it's also
deferred in this series.
Another possibility of having thrashing information would be to revisit
the idea of local reclaim in the form of zero-config memory control
groups. Instead of having allocating tasks go straight to global
reclaim, they could try to reclaim the pages in the memcg they are part
of first as long as the group is not thrashing. This would allow a user
to drop e.g. a back-up job in an otherwise unconfigured memcg and it
would only inflate (and possibly do global reclaim) until it has enough
memory to do proper readahead. But once it reaches that point and stops
thrashing it would just recycle its own used-once pages without kicking
out the cache of any other tasks in the system more than necessary.
This patch (of 10):
Fengguang Wu's build testing spotted problems with inc_zone_state() and
dec_zone_state() on UP configurations in out-of-tree patches.
inc_zone_state() is declared but not defined, dec_zone_state() is
missing entirely.
Just like with *_zone_page_state(), they can be defined like their
preemption-unsafe counterparts on UP.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: make it build]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Metin Doslu <metin@citusdata.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun@citusdata.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-04 05:47:34 +08:00
|
|
|
#define inc_zone_state __inc_zone_state
|
mm, vmstat: add infrastructure for per-node vmstats
Patchset: "Move LRU page reclaim from zones to nodes v9"
This series moves LRUs from the zones to the node. While this is a
current rebase, the test results were based on mmotm as of June 23rd.
Conceptually, this series is simple but there are a lot of details.
Some of the broad motivations for this are;
1. The residency of a page partially depends on what zone the page was
allocated from. This is partially combatted by the fair zone allocation
policy but that is a partial solution that introduces overhead in the
page allocator paths.
2. Currently, reclaim on node 0 behaves slightly different to node 1. For
example, direct reclaim scans in zonelist order and reclaims even if
the zone is over the high watermark regardless of the age of pages
in that LRU. Kswapd on the other hand starts reclaim on the highest
unbalanced zone. A difference in distribution of file/anon pages due
to when they were allocated results can result in a difference in
again. While the fair zone allocation policy mitigates some of the
problems here, the page reclaim results on a multi-zone node will
always be different to a single-zone node.
it was scheduled on as a result.
3. kswapd and the page allocator scan zones in the opposite order to
avoid interfering with each other but it's sensitive to timing. This
mitigates the page allocator using pages that were allocated very recently
in the ideal case but it's sensitive to timing. When kswapd is allocating
from lower zones then it's great but during the rebalancing of the highest
zone, the page allocator and kswapd interfere with each other. It's worse
if the highest zone is small and difficult to balance.
4. slab shrinkers are node-based which makes it harder to identify the exact
relationship between slab reclaim and LRU reclaim.
The reason we have zone-based reclaim is that we used to have
large highmem zones in common configurations and it was necessary
to quickly find ZONE_NORMAL pages for reclaim. Today, this is much
less of a concern as machines with lots of memory will (or should) use
64-bit kernels. Combinations of 32-bit hardware and 64-bit hardware are
rare. Machines that do use highmem should have relatively low highmem:lowmem
ratios than we worried about in the past.
Conceptually, moving to node LRUs should be easier to understand. The
page allocator plays fewer tricks to game reclaim and reclaim behaves
similarly on all nodes.
The series has been tested on a 16 core UMA machine and a 2-socket 48
core NUMA machine. The UMA results are presented in most cases as the NUMA
machine behaved similarly.
pagealloc
---------
This is a microbenchmark that shows the benefit of removing the fair zone
allocation policy. It was tested uip to order-4 but only orders 0 and 1 are
shown as the other orders were comparable.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min total-odr0-1 490.00 ( 0.00%) 457.00 ( 6.73%)
Min total-odr0-2 347.00 ( 0.00%) 329.00 ( 5.19%)
Min total-odr0-4 288.00 ( 0.00%) 273.00 ( 5.21%)
Min total-odr0-8 251.00 ( 0.00%) 239.00 ( 4.78%)
Min total-odr0-16 234.00 ( 0.00%) 222.00 ( 5.13%)
Min total-odr0-32 223.00 ( 0.00%) 211.00 ( 5.38%)
Min total-odr0-64 217.00 ( 0.00%) 208.00 ( 4.15%)
Min total-odr0-128 214.00 ( 0.00%) 204.00 ( 4.67%)
Min total-odr0-256 250.00 ( 0.00%) 230.00 ( 8.00%)
Min total-odr0-512 271.00 ( 0.00%) 269.00 ( 0.74%)
Min total-odr0-1024 291.00 ( 0.00%) 282.00 ( 3.09%)
Min total-odr0-2048 303.00 ( 0.00%) 296.00 ( 2.31%)
Min total-odr0-4096 311.00 ( 0.00%) 309.00 ( 0.64%)
Min total-odr0-8192 316.00 ( 0.00%) 314.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr0-16384 317.00 ( 0.00%) 315.00 ( 0.63%)
Min total-odr1-1 742.00 ( 0.00%) 712.00 ( 4.04%)
Min total-odr1-2 562.00 ( 0.00%) 530.00 ( 5.69%)
Min total-odr1-4 457.00 ( 0.00%) 433.00 ( 5.25%)
Min total-odr1-8 411.00 ( 0.00%) 381.00 ( 7.30%)
Min total-odr1-16 381.00 ( 0.00%) 356.00 ( 6.56%)
Min total-odr1-32 372.00 ( 0.00%) 346.00 ( 6.99%)
Min total-odr1-64 372.00 ( 0.00%) 343.00 ( 7.80%)
Min total-odr1-128 375.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 6.40%)
Min total-odr1-256 379.00 ( 0.00%) 351.00 ( 7.39%)
Min total-odr1-512 385.00 ( 0.00%) 355.00 ( 7.79%)
Min total-odr1-1024 386.00 ( 0.00%) 358.00 ( 7.25%)
Min total-odr1-2048 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-4096 390.00 ( 0.00%) 362.00 ( 7.18%)
Min total-odr1-8192 388.00 ( 0.00%) 363.00 ( 6.44%)
This shows a steady improvement throughout. The primary benefit is from
reduced system CPU usage which is obvious from the overall times;
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
User 189.19 191.80
System 2604.45 2533.56
Elapsed 2855.30 2786.39
The vmstats also showed that the fair zone allocation policy was definitely
removed as can be seen here;
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
DMA32 allocs 28794729769 0
Normal allocs 48432501431 77227309877
Movable allocs 0 0
tiobench on ext4
----------------
tiobench is a benchmark that artifically benefits if old pages remain resident
while new pages get reclaimed. The fair zone allocation policy mitigates this
problem so pages age fairly. While the benchmark has problems, it is important
that tiobench performance remains constant as it implies that page aging
problems that the fair zone allocation policy fixes are not re-introduced.
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Min PotentialReadSpeed 89.65 ( 0.00%) 90.21 ( 0.62%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-1 82.68 ( 0.00%) 82.01 ( -0.81%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-2 72.76 ( 0.00%) 72.07 ( -0.95%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-4 75.13 ( 0.00%) 74.92 ( -0.28%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-8 64.91 ( 0.00%) 65.19 ( 0.43%)
Min SeqRead-MB/sec-16 62.24 ( 0.00%) 62.22 ( -0.03%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-1 0.88 ( 0.00%) 0.88 ( 0.00%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-2 0.95 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( -3.16%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-4 1.43 ( 0.00%) 1.34 ( -6.29%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-8 1.61 ( 0.00%) 1.60 ( -0.62%)
Min RandRead-MB/sec-16 1.80 ( 0.00%) 1.90 ( 5.56%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-1 76.41 ( 0.00%) 76.85 ( 0.58%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-2 74.11 ( 0.00%) 73.54 ( -0.77%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-4 80.05 ( 0.00%) 80.13 ( 0.10%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-8 72.88 ( 0.00%) 73.20 ( 0.44%)
Min SeqWrite-MB/sec-16 75.91 ( 0.00%) 76.44 ( 0.70%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-1 1.18 ( 0.00%) 1.14 ( -3.39%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-2 1.02 ( 0.00%) 1.03 ( 0.98%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-4 1.05 ( 0.00%) 0.98 ( -6.67%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-8 0.89 ( 0.00%) 0.92 ( 3.37%)
Min RandWrite-MB/sec-16 0.92 ( 0.00%) 0.93 ( 1.09%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 approx-v9
User 645.72 525.90
System 403.85 331.75
Elapsed 6795.36 6783.67
This shows that the series has little or not impact on tiobench which is
desirable and a reduction in system CPU usage. It indicates that the fair
zone allocation policy was removed in a manner that didn't reintroduce
one class of page aging bug. There were only minor differences in overall
reclaim activity
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Minor Faults 645838 647465
Major Faults 573 640
Swap Ins 0 0
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 46041453 44190646
Normal allocs 78053072 79887245
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 24 67
Stall zone DMA 0 0
Stall zone DMA32 0 0
Stall zone Normal 0 2
Stall zone HighMem 0 0
Stall zone Movable 0 65
Direct pages scanned 10969 30609
Kswapd pages scanned 93375144 93492094
Kswapd pages reclaimed 93372243 93489370
Direct pages reclaimed 10969 30609
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 13741.015 13781.934
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 1.614 4.512
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
kswapd activity was roughly comparable. There were differences in direct
reclaim activity but negligible in the context of the overall workload
(velocity of 4 pages per second with the patches applied, 1.6 pages per
second in the baseline kernel).
pgbench read-only large configuration on ext4
---------------------------------------------
pgbench is a database benchmark that can be sensitive to page reclaim
decisions. This also checks if removing the fair zone allocation policy
is safe
pgbench Transactions
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Hmean 1 188.26 ( 0.00%) 189.78 ( 0.81%)
Hmean 5 330.66 ( 0.00%) 328.69 ( -0.59%)
Hmean 12 370.32 ( 0.00%) 380.72 ( 2.81%)
Hmean 21 368.89 ( 0.00%) 369.00 ( 0.03%)
Hmean 30 382.14 ( 0.00%) 360.89 ( -5.56%)
Hmean 32 428.87 ( 0.00%) 432.96 ( 0.95%)
Negligible differences again. As with tiobench, overall reclaim activity
was comparable.
bonnie++ on ext4
----------------
No interesting performance difference, negligible differences on reclaim
stats.
paralleldd on ext4
------------------
This workload uses varying numbers of dd instances to read large amounts of
data from disk.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Amean Elapsd-1 186.04 ( 0.00%) 189.41 ( -1.82%)
Amean Elapsd-3 192.27 ( 0.00%) 191.38 ( 0.46%)
Amean Elapsd-5 185.21 ( 0.00%) 182.75 ( 1.33%)
Amean Elapsd-7 183.71 ( 0.00%) 182.11 ( 0.87%)
Amean Elapsd-12 180.96 ( 0.00%) 181.58 ( -0.35%)
Amean Elapsd-16 181.36 ( 0.00%) 183.72 ( -1.30%)
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
User 1548.01 1552.44
System 8609.71 8515.08
Elapsed 3587.10 3594.54
There is little or no change in performance but some drop in system CPU usage.
4.7.0-rc3 4.7.0-rc3
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v9
Minor Faults 362662 367360
Major Faults 1204 1143
Swap Ins 22 0
Swap Outs 2855 1029
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 31409797 28837521
Normal allocs 46611853 49231282
Movable allocs 0 0
Direct pages scanned 0 0
Kswapd pages scanned 40845270 40869088
Kswapd pages reclaimed 40830976 40855294
Direct pages reclaimed 0 0
Kswapd efficiency 99% 99%
Kswapd velocity 11386.711 11369.769
Direct efficiency 100% 100%
Direct velocity 0.000 0.000
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 2855 1029
Page writes file 0 0
Page writes anon 2855 1029
Page reclaim immediate 771 1628
Sector Reads 293312636 293536360
Sector Writes 18213568 18186480
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 128257 132747
Direct inode steals 181 56
Kswapd inode steals 59 1131
It basically shows that kswapd was active at roughly the same rate in
both kernels. There was also comparable slab scanning activity and direct
reclaim was avoided in both cases. There appears to be a large difference
in numbers of inodes reclaimed but the workload has few active inodes and
is likely a timing artifact.
stutter
-------
stutter simulates a simple workload. One part uses a lot of anonymous
memory, a second measures mmap latency and a third copies a large file.
The primary metric is checking for mmap latency.
stutter
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623 nodelru-v8
Min mmap 16.6283 ( 0.00%) 13.4258 ( 19.26%)
1st-qrtle mmap 54.7570 ( 0.00%) 34.9121 ( 36.24%)
2nd-qrtle mmap 57.3163 ( 0.00%) 46.1147 ( 19.54%)
3rd-qrtle mmap 58.9976 ( 0.00%) 47.1882 ( 20.02%)
Max-90% mmap 59.7433 ( 0.00%) 47.4453 ( 20.58%)
Max-93% mmap 60.1298 ( 0.00%) 47.6037 ( 20.83%)
Max-95% mmap 73.4112 ( 0.00%) 82.8719 (-12.89%)
Max-99% mmap 92.8542 ( 0.00%) 88.8870 ( 4.27%)
Max mmap 1440.6569 ( 0.00%) 121.4201 ( 91.57%)
Mean mmap 59.3493 ( 0.00%) 42.2991 ( 28.73%)
Best99%Mean mmap 57.2121 ( 0.00%) 41.8207 ( 26.90%)
Best95%Mean mmap 55.9113 ( 0.00%) 39.9620 ( 28.53%)
Best90%Mean mmap 55.6199 ( 0.00%) 39.3124 ( 29.32%)
Best50%Mean mmap 53.2183 ( 0.00%) 33.1307 ( 37.75%)
Best10%Mean mmap 45.9842 ( 0.00%) 20.4040 ( 55.63%)
Best5%Mean mmap 43.2256 ( 0.00%) 17.9654 ( 58.44%)
Best1%Mean mmap 32.9388 ( 0.00%) 16.6875 ( 49.34%)
This shows a number of improvements with the worst-case outlier greatly
improved.
Some of the vmstats are interesting
4.7.0-rc4 4.7.0-rc4
mmotm-20160623nodelru-v8
Swap Ins 163 502
Swap Outs 0 0
DMA allocs 0 0
DMA32 allocs 618719206 1381662383
Normal allocs 891235743 564138421
Movable allocs 0 0
Allocation stalls 2603 1
Direct pages scanned 216787 2
Kswapd pages scanned 50719775 41778378
Kswapd pages reclaimed 41541765 41777639
Direct pages reclaimed 209159 0
Kswapd efficiency 81% 99%
Kswapd velocity 16859.554 14329.059
Direct efficiency 96% 0%
Direct velocity 72.061 0.001
Percentage direct scans 0% 0%
Page writes by reclaim 6215049 0
Page writes file 6215049 0
Page writes anon 0 0
Page reclaim immediate 70673 90
Sector Reads 81940800 81680456
Sector Writes 100158984 98816036
Page rescued immediate 0 0
Slabs scanned 1366954 22683
While this is not guaranteed in all cases, this particular test showed
a large reduction in direct reclaim activity. It's also worth noting
that no page writes were issued from reclaim context.
This series is not without its hazards. There are at least three areas
that I'm concerned with even though I could not reproduce any problems in
that area.
1. Reclaim/compaction is going to be affected because the amount of reclaim is
no longer targetted at a specific zone. Compaction works on a per-zone basis
so there is no guarantee that reclaiming a few THP's worth page pages will
have a positive impact on compaction success rates.
2. The Slab/LRU reclaim ratio is affected because the frequency the shrinkers
are called is now different. This may or may not be a problem but if it
is, it'll be because shrinkers are not called enough and some balancing
is required.
3. The anon/file reclaim ratio may be affected. Pages about to be dirtied are
distributed between zones and the fair zone allocation policy used to do
something very similar for anon. The distribution is now different but not
necessarily in any way that matters but it's still worth bearing in mind.
VM statistic counters for reclaim decisions are zone-based. If the kernel
is to reclaim on a per-node basis then we need to track per-node
statistics but there is no infrastructure for that. The most notable
change is that the old node_page_state is renamed to
sum_zone_node_page_state. The new node_page_state takes a pglist_data and
uses per-node stats but none exist yet. There is some renaming such as
vm_stat to vm_zone_stat and the addition of vm_node_stat and the renaming
of mod_state to mod_zone_state. Otherwise, this is mostly a mechanical
patch with no functional change. There is a lot of similarity between the
node and zone helpers which is unfortunate but there was no obvious way of
reusing the code and maintaining type safety.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467970510-21195-2-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-29 06:45:24 +08:00
|
|
|
#define inc_node_state __inc_node_state
|
mm: vmstat: fix UP zone state accounting
Summary:
The VM maintains cached filesystem pages on two types of lists. One
list holds the pages recently faulted into the cache, the other list
holds pages that have been referenced repeatedly on that first list.
The idea is to prefer reclaiming young pages over those that have shown
to benefit from caching in the past. We call the recently used list
"inactive list" and the frequently used list "active list".
Currently, the VM aims for a 1:1 ratio between the lists, which is the
"perfect" trade-off between the ability to *protect* frequently used
pages and the ability to *detect* frequently used pages. This means
that working set changes bigger than half of cache memory go undetected
and thrash indefinitely, whereas working sets bigger than half of cache
memory are unprotected against used-once streams that don't even need
caching.
This happens on file servers and media streaming servers, where the
popular files and file sections change over time. Even though the
individual files might be smaller than half of memory, concurrent access
to many of them may still result in their inter-reference distance being
greater than half of memory. It's also been reported as a problem on
database workloads that switch back and forth between tables that are
bigger than half of memory. In these cases the VM never recognizes the
new working set and will for the remainder of the workload thrash disk
data which could easily live in memory.
Historically, every reclaim scan of the inactive list also took a
smaller number of pages from the tail of the active list and moved them
to the head of the inactive list. This model gave established working
sets more gracetime in the face of temporary use-once streams, but
ultimately was not significantly better than a FIFO policy and still
thrashed cache based on eviction speed, rather than actual demand for
cache.
This series solves the problem by maintaining a history of pages evicted
from the inactive list, enabling the VM to detect frequently used pages
regardless of inactive list size and facilitate working set transitions.
Tests:
The reported database workload is easily demonstrated on a 8G machine
with two filesets a 6G. This fio workload operates on one set first,
then switches to the other. The VM should obviously always cache the
set that the workload is currently using.
This test is based on a problem encountered by Citus Data customers:
http://citusdata.com/blog/72-linux-memory-manager-and-your-big-data
unpatched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=885559KB/s, minb=885559KB/s, maxb=885559KB/s, mint= 113672msec, maxt= 113672msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb= 66169KB/s, minb= 66169KB/s, maxb= 66169KB/s, mint=1521302msec, maxt=1521302msec
sdb: ios=835750/4, merge=2/1, ticks=4659739/60016, in_queue=4719203, util=98.92%
real 27m15.541s
user 0m19.059s
sys 0m51.459s
patched:
db1: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=877783KB/s, minb=877783KB/s, maxb=877783KB/s, mint=114679msec, maxt=114679msec
db2: READ: io=98304MB, aggrb=397449KB/s, minb=397449KB/s, maxb=397449KB/s, mint=253273msec, maxt=253273msec
sdb: ios=170587/4, merge=2/1, ticks=954910/61123, in_queue=1015923, util=90.40%
real 6m8.630s
user 0m14.714s
sys 0m31.233s
As can be seen, the unpatched kernel simply never adapts to the
workingset change and db2 is stuck indefinitely with secondary storage
speed. The patched kernel needs 2-3 iterations over db2 before it
replaces db1 and reaches full memory speed. Given the unbounded
negative affect of the existing VM behavior, these patches should be
considered correctness fixes rather than performance optimizations.
Another test resembles a fileserver or streaming server workload, where
data in excess of memory size is accessed at different frequencies.
There is very hot data accessed at a high frequency. Machines should be
fitted so that the hot set of such a workload can be fully cached or all
bets are off. Then there is a very big (compared to available memory)
set of data that is used-once or at a very low frequency; this is what
drives the inactive list and does not really benefit from caching.
Lastly, there is a big set of warm data in between that is accessed at
medium frequencies and benefits from caching the pages between the first
and last streamer of each burst.
unpatched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160693KB/s, minb=160693KB/s, maxb=160693KB/s, mint=815665msec, maxt=815665msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=109853KB/s, minb= 27463KB/s, maxb= 29244KB/s, mint=717110msec, maxt=763617msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 35245KB/s, minb= 35245KB/s, maxb= 35245KB/s, mint=892530msec, maxt=892530msec
sdb: ios=797960/4, merge=11763/1, ticks=4307910/796, in_queue=4308380, util=100.00%
patched:
hot: READ: io=128000MB, aggrb=160678KB/s, minb=160678KB/s, maxb=160678KB/s, mint=815740msec, maxt=815740msec
warm: READ: io= 81920MB, aggrb=147747KB/s, minb= 36936KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=512000msec, maxt=567767msec
cold: READ: io= 30720MB, aggrb= 40960KB/s, minb= 40960KB/s, maxb= 40960KB/s, mint=768000msec, maxt=768000msec
sdb: ios=596514/4, merge=9341/1, ticks=2395362/997, in_queue=2396484, util=79.18%
In both kernels, the hot set is propagated to the active list and then
served from cache.
In both kernels, the beginning of the warm set is propagated to the
active list as well, but in the unpatched case the active list
eventually takes up half of memory and no new pages from the warm set
get activated, despite repeated access, and despite most of the active
list soon being stale. The patched kernel on the other hand detects the
thrashing and manages to keep this cache window rolling through the data
set. This frees up enough IO bandwidth that the cold set is served at
full speed as well and disk utilization even drops by 20%.
For reference, this same test was performed with the traditional
demotion mechanism, where deactivation is coupled to inactive list
reclaim. However, this had the same outcome as the unpatched kernel:
while the warm set does indeed get activated continuously, it is forced
out of the active list by inactive list pressure, which is dictated
primarily by the unrelated cold set. The warm set is evicted before
subsequent streamers can benefit from it, even though there would be
enough space available to cache the pages of interest.
Costs:
Page reclaim used to shrink the radix trees but now the tree nodes are
reused for shadow entries, where the cost depends heavily on the page
cache access patterns. However, with workloads that maintain spatial or
temporal locality, the shadow entries are either refaulted quickly or
reclaimed along with the inode object itself. Workloads that will
experience a memory cost increase are those that don't really benefit
from caching in the first place.
A more predictable alternative would be a fixed-cost separate pool of
shadow entries, but this would incur relatively higher memory cost for
well-behaved workloads at the benefit of cornercases. It would also
make the shadow entry lookup more costly compared to storing them
directly in the cache structure.
Future:
To simplify the merging process, this patch set is implementing thrash
detection on a global per-zone level only for now, but the design is
such that it can be extended to memory cgroups as well. All we need to
do is store the unique cgroup ID along the node and zone identifier
inside the eviction cookie to identify the lruvec.
Right now we have a fixed ratio (50:50) between inactive and active list
but we already have complaints about working sets exceeding half of
memory being pushed out of the cache by simple streaming in the
background. Ultimately, we want to adjust this ratio and allow for a
much smaller inactive list. These patches are an essential step in this
direction because they decouple the VMs ability to detect working set
changes from the inactive list size. This would allow us to base the
inactive list size on the combined readahead window size for example and
potentially protect a much bigger working set.
It's also a big step towards activating pages with a reuse distance
larger than memory, as long as they are the most frequently used pages
in the workload. This will require knowing more about the access
frequency of active pages than what we measure right now, so it's also
deferred in this series.
Another possibility of having thrashing information would be to revisit
the idea of local reclaim in the form of zero-config memory control
groups. Instead of having allocating tasks go straight to global
reclaim, they could try to reclaim the pages in the memcg they are part
of first as long as the group is not thrashing. This would allow a user
to drop e.g. a back-up job in an otherwise unconfigured memcg and it
would only inflate (and possibly do global reclaim) until it has enough
memory to do proper readahead. But once it reaches that point and stops
thrashing it would just recycle its own used-once pages without kicking
out the cache of any other tasks in the system more than necessary.
This patch (of 10):
Fengguang Wu's build testing spotted problems with inc_zone_state() and
dec_zone_state() on UP configurations in out-of-tree patches.
inc_zone_state() is declared but not defined, dec_zone_state() is
missing entirely.
Just like with *_zone_page_state(), they can be defined like their
preemption-unsafe counterparts on UP.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: make it build]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Metin Doslu <metin@citusdata.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun@citusdata.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru>
Cc: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-04 05:47:34 +08:00
|
|
|
#define dec_zone_state __dec_zone_state
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-01-14 07:45:43 +08:00
|
|
|
#define set_pgdat_percpu_threshold(pgdat, callback) { }
|
mm: page allocator: adjust the per-cpu counter threshold when memory is low
Commit aa45484 ("calculate a better estimate of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory
is low") noted that watermarks were based on the vmstat NR_FREE_PAGES. To
avoid synchronization overhead, these counters are maintained on a per-cpu
basis and drained both periodically and when a threshold is above a
threshold. On large CPU systems, the difference between the estimate and
real value of NR_FREE_PAGES can be very high. The system can get into a
case where pages are allocated far below the min watermark potentially
causing livelock issues. The commit solved the problem by taking a better
reading of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory was low.
Unfortately, as reported by Shaohua Li this accurate reading can consume a
large amount of CPU time on systems with many sockets due to cache line
bouncing. This patch takes a different approach. For large machines
where counter drift might be unsafe and while kswapd is awake, the per-cpu
thresholds for the target pgdat are reduced to limit the level of drift to
what should be a safe level. This incurs a performance penalty in heavy
memory pressure by a factor that depends on the workload and the machine
but the machine should function correctly without accidentally exhausting
all memory on a node. There is an additional cost when kswapd wakes and
sleeps but the event is not expected to be frequent - in Shaohua's test
case, there was one recorded sleep and wake event at least.
To ensure that kswapd wakes up, a safe version of zone_watermark_ok() is
introduced that takes a more accurate reading of NR_FREE_PAGES when called
from wakeup_kswapd, when deciding whether it is really safe to go back to
sleep in sleeping_prematurely() and when deciding if a zone is really
balanced or not in balance_pgdat(). We are still using an expensive
function but limiting how often it is called.
When the test case is reproduced, the time spent in the watermark
functions is reduced. The following report is on the percentage of time
spent cumulatively spent in the functions zone_nr_free_pages(),
zone_watermark_ok(), __zone_watermark_ok(), zone_watermark_ok_safe(),
zone_page_state_snapshot(), zone_page_state().
vanilla 11.6615%
disable-threshold 0.2584%
David said:
: We had to pull aa454840 "mm: page allocator: calculate a better estimate
: of NR_FREE_PAGES when memory is low and kswapd is awake" from 2.6.36
: internally because tests showed that it would cause the machine to stall
: as the result of heavy kswapd activity. I merged it back with this fix as
: it is pending in the -mm tree and it solves the issue we were seeing, so I
: definitely think this should be pushed to -stable (and I would seriously
: consider it for 2.6.37 inclusion even at this late date).
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Reported-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Tested-by: Nicolas Bareil <nico@chdir.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Kyle McMartin <kyle@mcmartin.ca>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org> [2.6.37.1, 2.6.36.x]
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-01-14 07:45:41 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2011-05-25 08:11:33 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void refresh_zone_stat_thresholds(void) { }
|
2013-09-12 05:21:30 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void cpu_vm_stats_fold(int cpu) { }
|
2016-01-15 07:21:40 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void quiet_vmstat(void) { }
|
2011-05-25 08:11:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2012-10-09 07:33:39 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void drain_zonestat(struct zone *zone,
|
|
|
|
|
struct per_cpu_pageset *pset) { }
|
2011-05-25 08:11:28 +08:00
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-10-09 07:32:02 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __mod_zone_freepage_state(struct zone *zone, int nr_pages,
|
|
|
|
|
int migratetype)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_PAGES, nr_pages);
|
|
|
|
|
if (is_migrate_cma(migratetype))
|
|
|
|
|
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES, nr_pages);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-05-25 08:11:28 +08:00
|
|
|
extern const char * const vmstat_text[];
|
2006-06-30 16:55:33 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#endif /* _LINUX_VMSTAT_H */
|