Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp2625262wrg; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:13:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELugRH6x11uK1Q3rEnJjCP04mfb6eUa7LeEUdf4UqaUoGT7FVikw6qoqDBGk0tvp5dFJldhH X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:501:: with SMTP id 1-v6mr13213457plf.283.1520259187427; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 06:13:07 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1520259187; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=jizrp3l/TXCzom9KCuckLex88FjlFQt8gZljBRAIUtXdN7N56tBzzbJYfUwxZ5bblm TV8jEr8w3D2MW9O4gkqHO1ckiMBh903dKYZEPAVnElUHVfSIomx+3aXgC7osubKBPkdv OXWqnCKDfdjbRRF5f7KuVK2fhTBjeF54Yxzne002dyLS6y6Tpk6aAcqZInYh6kxQBJys fToCQtPy3BPp79Ca2aGP6Vwt3f9W00En8q+ojAsiOVQW83vzOrCUvkDJwaWz1N8wSBEj 1NLjIvI1PgMKlvNkU5zcVRs/q50b7mN6unz92WXqBC9HL4Dd9yJ8C5qAhbuZtXogOdgo OPWg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=FbOZxNsh92XHcRc1jD8fwHfm7S1xlQRhotdmHMg5EWA=; b=JVNvA1U6GX49qW7Z8q+YP9kHdZ330TUW+E/Bb4IRXn//ovTqEUbMA3lvwGq+SrPWCh LHNn67luX/5Nfcn+E/qicdrPTTHGwscYEYKzS0Z94rBjCF61VxYTtm4TwE+aUzLJPiDB 4R0STQeaARhfViJ7nb96Z3W/0rzSAmCqW1sWR06zgPZ3v2K4eSK7NDraQJiAzjsGuYUr pxySTnrES/1cHQjge4u8zVrIoSdcQ37vUIqCcCoGn6j6zNezGzTMy1wSbwOCB+Yho/TK 4DLK0pLq9RtT77nEKWpJE+cIsGr4T4NVoikmHM2XmLdg5wnpusyh9FjUSH1DHRQj9eew CLcA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q9si10304162pfk.124.2018.03.05.06.12.53; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 06:13:07 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934228AbeCELsc (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:48:32 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:31704 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932891AbeCELsb (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:48:31 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Mar 2018 03:48:31 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,426,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="32476668" Received: from unknown (HELO intel.com) ([10.254.213.201]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2018 03:48:27 -0800 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 19:48:27 +0800 From: Aaron Lu To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Huang Ying , Dave Hansen , Kemi Wang , Tim Chen , Andi Kleen , Mel Gorman , Matthew Wilcox , David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: prefetch buddy while not holding lock Message-ID: <20180305114826.GA2184@intel.com> References: <20180301062845.26038-1-aaron.lu@intel.com> <20180301062845.26038-4-aaron.lu@intel.com> <20180301140044.GK15057@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180305114159.GA32573@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180305114159.GA32573@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 07:41:59PM +0800, Aaron Lu wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 06:55:25PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > On 03/01/2018 03:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Thu 01-03-18 14:28:45, Aaron Lu wrote: > > >> When a page is freed back to the global pool, its buddy will be checked > > >> to see if it's possible to do a merge. This requires accessing buddy's > > >> page structure and that access could take a long time if it's cache cold. > > >> > > >> This patch adds a prefetch to the to-be-freed page's buddy outside of > > >> zone->lock in hope of accessing buddy's page structure later under > > >> zone->lock will be faster. Since we *always* do buddy merging and check > > >> an order-0 page's buddy to try to merge it when it goes into the main > > >> allocator, the cacheline will always come in, i.e. the prefetched data > > >> will never be unused. > > >> > > >> In the meantime, there are two concerns: > > >> 1 the prefetch could potentially evict existing cachelines, especially > > >> for L1D cache since it is not huge; > > >> 2 there is some additional instruction overhead, namely calculating > > >> buddy pfn twice. > > >> > > >> For 1, it's hard to say, this microbenchmark though shows good result but > > >> the actual benefit of this patch will be workload/CPU dependant; > > >> For 2, since the calculation is a XOR on two local variables, it's expected > > >> in many cases that cycles spent will be offset by reduced memory latency > > >> later. This is especially true for NUMA machines where multiple CPUs are > > >> contending on zone->lock and the most time consuming part under zone->lock > > >> is the wait of 'struct page' cacheline of the to-be-freed pages and their > > >> buddies. > > >> > > >> Test with will-it-scale/page_fault1 full load: > > >> > > >> kernel Broadwell(2S) Skylake(2S) Broadwell(4S) Skylake(4S) > > >> v4.16-rc2+ 9034215 7971818 13667135 15677465 > > >> patch2/3 9536374 +5.6% 8314710 +4.3% 14070408 +3.0% 16675866 +6.4% > > >> this patch 10338868 +8.4% 8544477 +2.8% 14839808 +5.5% 17155464 +2.9% > > >> Note: this patch's performance improvement percent is against patch2/3. > > > > > > I am really surprised that this has such a big impact. > > > > It's even stranger to me. Struct page is 64 bytes these days, exactly a > > a cache line. Unless that changed, Intel CPUs prefetched a "buddy" cache > > line (that forms an aligned 128 bytes block with the one we touch). > > Which is exactly a order-0 buddy struct page! Maybe that implicit > > prefetching stopped at L2 and explicit goes all the way to L1, can't > > The Intel Architecture Optimization Manual section 7.3.2 says: > > prefetchT0 - fetch data into all cache levels > Intel Xeon Processors based on Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy Bridge and newer > microarchitectures: 1st, 2nd and 3rd level cache. > > prefetchT2 - fetch data into 2nd and 3rd level caches (identical to > prefetchT1) > Intel Xeon Processors based on Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy Bridge and newer > microarchitectures: 2nd and 3rd level cache. > > prefetchNTA - fetch data into non-temporal cache close to the processor, > minimizing cache pollution > Intel Xeon Processors based on Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy Bridge and newer > microarchitectures: must fetch into 3rd level cache with fast replacement. > > I tried 'prefetcht0' and 'prefetcht2' instead of the default > 'prefetchNTA' on a 2 sockets Intel Skylake, the two ended up with about ~~~~~~~ Correction: should be Broadwell here. > the same performance number as prefetchNTA. I had expected prefetchT0 to > deliver a better score if it was indeed due to L1D since prefetchT2 will > not place data into L1 while prefetchT0 will, but looks like it is not > the case here. > > It feels more like the buddy cacheline isn't in any level of the caches > without prefetch for some reason.