Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754702Ab3ITMcD (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:32:03 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:50346 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754467Ab3ITMcB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:32:01 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,944,1371106800"; d="scan'208";a="406389069" From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Alex Thorlton Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Naoya Horiguchi , "Eric W . Biederman" , "Paul E . McKenney" , Al Viro , Andi Kleen , Andrea Arcangeli , Dave Hansen , Dave Jones , David Howells , Frederic Weisbecker , Johannes Weiner , Kees Cook , Mel Gorman , Michael Kerrisk , Oleg Nesterov , Peter Zijlstra , Rik van Riel , Robin Holt , Sedat Dilek , Srikar Dronamraju , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20130919171727.GC6802@sgi.com> References: <1379330740-5602-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20130919171727.GC6802@sgi.com> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/9] split page table lock for PMD tables Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20130920123137.BE2F7E0090@blue.fi.intel.com> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:31:37 +0300 (EEST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1672 Lines: 42 Alex Thorlton wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 02:25:31PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Alex Thorlton noticed that some massivly threaded workloads work poorly, > > if THP enabled. This patchset fixes this by introducing split page table > > lock for PMD tables. hugetlbfs is not covered yet. > > > > This patchset is based on work by Naoya Horiguchi. > > > > Changes: > > v2: > > - reuse CONFIG_SPLIT_PTLOCK_CPUS for PMD split lock; > > - s/huge_pmd_lock/pmd_lock/g; > > - assume pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() can fail; > > - fix format line in task_mem() for VmPTE; > > > > Benchmark (from Alex): ftp://shell.sgi.com/collect/appsx_test/pthread_test.tar.gz > > Run on 4 socket Westmere with 128 GiB of RAM. > > Kirill, > > I'm hitting some performance issues with these patches on our larger > machines (>=128 cores/256 threads). I've managed to livelock larger > systems with one of our tests (I'll publish this one soon), and I'm > actually seeing a performance hit on some of the smaller ones. Does "performance hit" mean performance degradation? > I'm currently collecting some results to show the problems I'm hitting, and > trying to research what's causing the livelock. For now I just wanted to let > you know that I'm seeing some issues. I'll be in touch with more details. Looking forward for more details. Thanks for testing. I'll try to find a bigger machine myself. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/