From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Oscar Salvador <OSalvador@suse.com>,
Yuanxi Liu <y.liu@naruida.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: Skip regions with hugetlbfs pages when allocating 1G pages
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:14:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230414141429.pwgieuwluxwez3rj@techsingularity.net> (raw)
A bug was reported by Yuanxi Liu where allocating 1G pages at runtime is
taking an excessive amount of time for large amounts of memory. Further
testing allocating huge pages that the cost is linear i.e. if allocating
1G pages in batches of 10 then the time to allocate nr_hugepages from
10->20->30->etc increases linearly even though 10 pages are allocated at
each step. Profiles indicated that much of the time is spent checking the
validity within already existing huge pages and then attempting a migration
that fails after isolating the range, draining pages and a whole lot of
other useless work.
Commit eb14d4eefdc4 ("mm,page_alloc: drop unnecessary checks from
pfn_range_valid_contig") removed two checks, one which ignored huge pages
for contiguous allocations as huge pages can sometimes migrate. While
there may be value on migrating a 2M page to satisfy a 1G allocation, it's
potentially expensive if the 1G allocation fails and it's pointless to
try moving a 1G page for a new 1G allocation or scan the tail pages for
valid PFNs.
Reintroduce the PageHuge check and assume any contiguous region with
hugetlbfs pages is unsuitable for a new 1G allocation.
The hpagealloc test allocates huge pages in batches and reports the
average latency per page over time. This test happens just after boot when
fragmentation is not an issue. Units are in milliseconds.
hpagealloc
6.3.0-rc6 6.3.0-rc6 6.3.0-rc6
vanilla hugeallocrevert-v1r1 hugeallocsimple-v1r2
Min Latency 26.42 ( 0.00%) 5.07 ( 80.82%) 18.94 ( 28.30%)
1st-qrtle Latency 356.61 ( 0.00%) 5.34 ( 98.50%) 19.85 ( 94.43%)
2nd-qrtle Latency 697.26 ( 0.00%) 5.47 ( 99.22%) 20.44 ( 97.07%)
3rd-qrtle Latency 972.94 ( 0.00%) 5.50 ( 99.43%) 20.81 ( 97.86%)
Max-1 Latency 26.42 ( 0.00%) 5.07 ( 80.82%) 18.94 ( 28.30%)
Max-5 Latency 82.14 ( 0.00%) 5.11 ( 93.78%) 19.31 ( 76.49%)
Max-10 Latency 150.54 ( 0.00%) 5.20 ( 96.55%) 19.43 ( 87.09%)
Max-90 Latency 1164.45 ( 0.00%) 5.53 ( 99.52%) 20.97 ( 98.20%)
Max-95 Latency 1223.06 ( 0.00%) 5.55 ( 99.55%) 21.06 ( 98.28%)
Max-99 Latency 1278.67 ( 0.00%) 5.57 ( 99.56%) 22.56 ( 98.24%)
Max Latency 1310.90 ( 0.00%) 8.06 ( 99.39%) 26.62 ( 97.97%)
Amean Latency 678.36 ( 0.00%) 5.44 * 99.20%* 20.44 * 96.99%*
6.3.0-rc6 6.3.0-rc6 6.3.0-rc6
vanilla revert-v1 hugeallocfix-v2
Duration User 0.28 0.27 0.30
Duration System 808.66 17.77 35.99
Duration Elapsed 830.87 18.08 36.33
The vanilla kernel is poor, taking up to 1.3 second to allocate a huge page
and almost 10 minutes in total to run the test. Reverting the problematic
commit reduces it to 8ms at worst and the patch takes 26ms. This patch
fixes the main issue with skipping huge pages but leaves the page_count()
out because a page with an elevated count potentially can migrate.
BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217022
Fixes: eb14d4eefdc4 ("mm,page_alloc: drop unnecessary checks from pfn_range_valid_contig")
Reported-by: Yuanxi Liu <y.liu@naruida.com>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 7136c36c5d01..b47f520c3051 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -9450,6 +9450,9 @@ static bool pfn_range_valid_contig(struct zone *z, unsigned long start_pfn,
if (PageReserved(page))
return false;
+
+ if (PageHuge(page))
+ return false;
}
return true;
}
next reply other threads:[~2023-04-14 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-14 14:14 Mel Gorman [this message]
2023-04-14 14:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-04-14 14:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-04-14 14:53 ` Michal Hocko
2023-04-14 19:46 ` Andrew Morton
2023-04-14 23:20 ` Doug Berger
2023-04-17 8:09 ` Mel Gorman
2023-04-16 15:31 ` Oscar Salvador
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230414141429.pwgieuwluxwez3rj@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=OSalvador@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=y.liu@naruida.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®