From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57B823F9ED for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 12:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708603667; cv=none; b=aDpzChtt+ipnGIKSumH28xfFoAY9wBiERs1XgA6NUk/0FoTLKXxASPSaNooaERJ0J7sl6iVxzkqSfZHoMbZ3TV2dohOvFgQvSBO2yVCQ/4Wz+a514WynSL/PXnTFGushF5SaBU95WzKhBqorb0+gfaVh2jG5LRnyGPuNOceVdOM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708603667; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OyVyEzm6PAoZwqACVETHMIR8OveG5ztRrupRqvUuqXc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=EhRs0ncOeGKofgQ/4erSe237xj21h+wF4dQfjsnq3HjyIngDhbOif9ELN42OIZ46LBXO85Ytxojp81at3XY0ygnwIXp1Pst21/BQOhGOjO9SUBp3pF8A3HuYAqsa5edvHOKtDHR7jx8a33/GI5We60eYfiG66hMjByJbdoWWs4c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=fe2xFJoP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="fe2xFJoP" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1708603666; x=1740139666; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OyVyEzm6PAoZwqACVETHMIR8OveG5ztRrupRqvUuqXc=; b=fe2xFJoPE0Swie4uo3RzkcWmuWYyywmhtkao1Spr2HUmfzYgjgvrlig0 5n93jMpdexgM1wYGqz8UejAHDVFRFJMg/iQz1ZFolYk9oypY1hbuTPHLB 3C8RmO9cMALLdUTJCJJHKXxgh8hQGwA1ja2FCe85tdz8u4KZYJLcRdKq5 OUXQKD3N5YpOoC80mSFe26PX/B4fGu7JAKoxlj+0Rmv9YaD2rA7nhAPun mDOYd93qDWsLXng8RCYSF5oBNb3dh8gzKsBTWsV7NfeFPpLQk47fLqfB/ 0c55ezYfus09ZBz2AUMaeSClyszkr7nRX9SYK/65t0BIG/Gt537w9118+ A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10991"; a="2974025" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,177,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="2974025" Received: from orviesa006.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.146]) by orvoesa108.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Feb 2024 04:07:45 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,177,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="5843178" Received: from linux-pnp-server-09.sh.intel.com ([10.239.176.190]) by orviesa006.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Feb 2024 04:07:42 -0800 From: rulinhuang To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, urezki@gmail.com Cc: colin.king@intel.com, hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lstoakes@gmail.com, rulin.huang@intel.com, tianyou.li@intel.com, tim.c.chen@intel.com, wangyang.guo@intel.com, zhiguo.zhou@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/vmalloc: lock contention optimization under multi-threading Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:10:45 -0500 Message-ID: <20240222121045.216556-1-rulin.huang@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Uladzislau and Andrew, we have rebased it(Patch v4) on branch mm-unstable and remeasured it. Could you kindly help confirm if this is the right base to work on? Compared to the previous result at kernel v6.7 with a 5% performance gain on intel icelake(160 vcpu), we only had a 0.6% with this commit base. But we think our modification still has some significance. On the one hand, this does reduce a critical section. On the other hand, we have a 4% performance gain on intel sapphire rapids(224 vcpu), which suggests more performance improvement would likely be achieved when the core count of processors increases to hundreds or even thousands. Thank you again for your comments.