mm/mempolicy.c: convert the shared_policy lock to a rwlock
When running the SPECint_rate gcc on some very large boxes it was noticed that the system was spending lots of time in mpol_shared_policy_lookup(). The gamess benchmark can also show it and is what I mostly used to chase down the issue since the setup for that I found to be easier. To be clear the binaries were on tmpfs because of disk I/O requirements. We then used text replication to avoid icache misses and having all the copies banging on the memory where the instruction code resides. This results in us hitting a bottleneck in mpol_shared_policy_lookup() since lookup is serialised by the shared_policy lock. I have only reproduced this on very large (3k+ cores) boxes. The problem starts showing up at just a few hundred ranks getting worse until it threatens to livelock once it gets large enough. For example on the gamess benchmark at 128 ranks this area consumes only ~1% of time, at 512 ranks it consumes nearly 13%, and at 2k ranks it is over 90%. To alleviate the contention in this area I converted the spinlock to an rwlock. This allows a large number of lookups to happen simultaneously. The results were quite good reducing this consumtion at max ranks to around 2%. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: tidy up code comments] Signed-off-by: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Nadia Yvette Chambers <nyc@holomorphy.com> Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
8f235d1a3e
commit
4a8c7bb59a
|
@ -738,7 +738,7 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb,
|
|||
/*
|
||||
* The policy is initialized here even if we are creating a
|
||||
* private inode because initialization simply creates an
|
||||
* an empty rb tree and calls spin_lock_init(), later when we
|
||||
* an empty rb tree and calls rwlock_init(), later when we
|
||||
* call mpol_free_shared_policy() it will just return because
|
||||
* the rb tree will still be empty.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ struct sp_node {
|
|||
|
||||
struct shared_policy {
|
||||
struct rb_root root;
|
||||
spinlock_t lock;
|
||||
rwlock_t lock;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
int vma_dup_policy(struct vm_area_struct *src, struct vm_area_struct *dst);
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -2142,12 +2142,14 @@ bool __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
|
|||
*
|
||||
* Remember policies even when nobody has shared memory mapped.
|
||||
* The policies are kept in Red-Black tree linked from the inode.
|
||||
* They are protected by the sp->lock spinlock, which should be held
|
||||
* They are protected by the sp->lock rwlock, which should be held
|
||||
* for any accesses to the tree.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
/* lookup first element intersecting start-end */
|
||||
/* Caller holds sp->lock */
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* lookup first element intersecting start-end. Caller holds sp->lock for
|
||||
* reading or for writing
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static struct sp_node *
|
||||
sp_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
@ -2178,8 +2180,10 @@ sp_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
|
|||
return rb_entry(n, struct sp_node, nd);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/* Insert a new shared policy into the list. */
|
||||
/* Caller holds sp->lock */
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Insert a new shared policy into the list. Caller holds sp->lock for
|
||||
* writing.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static void sp_insert(struct shared_policy *sp, struct sp_node *new)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct rb_node **p = &sp->root.rb_node;
|
||||
|
@ -2211,13 +2215,13 @@ mpol_shared_policy_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long idx)
|
|||
|
||||
if (!sp->root.rb_node)
|
||||
return NULL;
|
||||
spin_lock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
read_lock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
sn = sp_lookup(sp, idx, idx+1);
|
||||
if (sn) {
|
||||
mpol_get(sn->policy);
|
||||
pol = sn->policy;
|
||||
}
|
||||
spin_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
read_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
return pol;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -2360,7 +2364,7 @@ static int shared_policy_replace(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start,
|
|||
int ret = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
restart:
|
||||
spin_lock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
write_lock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
n = sp_lookup(sp, start, end);
|
||||
/* Take care of old policies in the same range. */
|
||||
while (n && n->start < end) {
|
||||
|
@ -2393,7 +2397,7 @@ static int shared_policy_replace(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start,
|
|||
}
|
||||
if (new)
|
||||
sp_insert(sp, new);
|
||||
spin_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
write_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
ret = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
err_out:
|
||||
|
@ -2405,7 +2409,7 @@ static int shared_policy_replace(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start,
|
|||
return ret;
|
||||
|
||||
alloc_new:
|
||||
spin_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
write_unlock(&sp->lock);
|
||||
ret = -ENOMEM;
|
||||
n_new = kmem_cache_alloc(sn_cache, GFP_KERNEL);
|
||||
if (!n_new)
|
||||
|
@ -2431,7 +2435,7 @@ void mpol_shared_policy_init(struct shared_policy *sp, struct mempolicy *mpol)
|
|||
int ret;
|
||||
|
||||
sp->root = RB_ROOT; /* empty tree == default mempolicy */
|
||||
spin_lock_init(&sp->lock);
|
||||
rwlock_init(&sp->lock);
|
||||
|
||||
if (mpol) {
|
||||
struct vm_area_struct pvma;
|
||||
|
@ -2497,14 +2501,14 @@ void mpol_free_shared_policy(struct shared_policy *p)
|
|||
|
||||
if (!p->root.rb_node)
|
||||
return;
|
||||
spin_lock(&p->lock);
|
||||
write_lock(&p->lock);
|
||||
next = rb_first(&p->root);
|
||||
while (next) {
|
||||
n = rb_entry(next, struct sp_node, nd);
|
||||
next = rb_next(&n->nd);
|
||||
sp_delete(p, n);
|
||||
}
|
||||
spin_unlock(&p->lock);
|
||||
write_unlock(&p->lock);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue