mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Liu, Yujie" <yujie.liu@intel.com>
To: "mgorman@techsingularity.net" <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: "raghavendra.kt@amd.com" <raghavendra.kt@amd.com>,
	"Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	"yu.chen.surf@gmail.com" <yu.chen.surf@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Zhou, Xiaoping" <xiaoping.zhou@intel.com>,
	"juri.lelli@redhat.com" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/numa: Fix the vma scan starving issue
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:48:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <235394aee595eaefd4bd442d00201ab44cd47de1.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5s55bgrmpomlpefmvt4bz7t2myvjnbw6lnvtsnbkdphwfb7zdo@tnm7flx5jidu>

On Wed, 2024-08-21 at 11:04 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 04:22:28PM +0800, Yujie Liu wrote:
> > Problem statement:
> > Since commit fc137c0ddab2 ("sched/numa: enhance vma scanning logic"), the
> > Numa vma scan overhead has been reduced a lot. Meanwhile, the reducing of
> > the vma scan might create less Numa page fault information. The
> > insufficient information makes it harder for the Numa balancer to make
> > decision. Later, commit b7a5b537c55c08 ("sched/numa: Complete scanning of
> > partial VMAs regardless of PID activity") and commit 84db47ca7146d7
> > ("sched/numa: Fix mm numa_scan_seq based unconditional scan") are found
> > to bring back part of the performance.
> > 
> > Recently when running SPECcpu omnetpp_r on a 320 CPUs/2 Sockets system,
> > a long duration of remote Numa node read was observed by PMU events:
> > A few cores having ~500MB/s remote memory access for ~20 seconds.
> > It causes high core-to-core variance and performance penalty. After the
> > investigation, it is found that many vmas are skipped due to the active
> > PID check. According to the trace events, in most cases, vma_is_accessed()
> > returns false because the history access info stored in pids_active
> > array has been cleared.
> > 
> > Proposal:
> > The main idea is to adjust vma_is_accessed() to let it return true easier.
> > Thus compare the diff between mm->numa_scan_seq and
> > vma->numab_state->prev_scan_seq. If the diff has exceeded the threshold,
> > scan the vma.
> > 
> > This patch especially helps the cases where there are small number of
> > threads, like the process-based SPECcpu. Without this patch, if the
> > SPECcpu process access the vma at the beginning, then sleeps for a long
> > time, the pid_active array will be cleared. A a result, if this process
> > is woken up again, it never has a chance to set prot_none anymore.
> > Because only the first 2 times of access is granted for vma scan:
> > (current->mm->numa_scan_seq) - vma->numab_state->start_scan_seq) < 2
> > to be worse, no other threads within the task can help set the prot_none.
> > This causes information lost.
> > 
> > Raghavendra helped test current patch and got the positive result
> > on the AMD platform:
> > 
> > autonumabench NUMA01
> >                             base                  patched
> > Amean     syst-NUMA01      194.05 (   0.00%)      165.11 *  14.92%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA01      324.86 (   0.00%)      315.58 *   2.86%*
> > 
> > Duration User      380345.36   368252.04
> > Duration System      1358.89     1156.23
> > Duration Elapsed     2277.45     2213.25
> > 
> > autonumabench NUMA02
> > 
> > Amean     syst-NUMA02        1.12 (   0.00%)        1.09 *   2.93%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA02        3.50 (   0.00%)        3.56 *  -1.84%*
> > 
> > Duration User        1513.23     1575.48
> > Duration System         8.33        8.13
> > Duration Elapsed       28.59       29.71
> > 
> > kernbench
> > 
> > Amean     user-256    22935.42 (   0.00%)    22535.19 *   1.75%*
> > Amean     syst-256     7284.16 (   0.00%)     7608.72 *  -4.46%*
> > Amean     elsp-256      159.01 (   0.00%)      158.17 *   0.53%*
> > 
> > Duration User       68816.41    67615.74
> > Duration System     21873.94    22848.08
> > Duration Elapsed      506.66      504.55
> > 
> > Intel 256 CPUs/2 Sockets:
> > autonuma benchmark also shows improvements:
> > 
> >                                                v6.10-rc5              v6.10-rc5
> >                                                                          +patch
> > Amean     syst-NUMA01                  245.85 (   0.00%)      230.84 *   6.11%*
> > Amean     syst-NUMA01_THREADLOCAL      205.27 (   0.00%)      191.86 *   6.53%*
> > Amean     syst-NUMA02                   18.57 (   0.00%)       18.09 *   2.58%*
> > Amean     syst-NUMA02_SMT                2.63 (   0.00%)        2.54 *   3.47%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA01                  517.17 (   0.00%)      526.34 *  -1.77%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA01_THREADLOCAL       99.92 (   0.00%)      100.59 *  -0.67%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA02                   15.81 (   0.00%)       15.72 *   0.59%*
> > Amean     elsp-NUMA02_SMT               13.23 (   0.00%)       12.89 *   2.53%*
> > 
> >                    v6.10-rc5   v6.10-rc5
> >                                   +patch
> > Duration User     1064010.16  1075416.23
> > Duration System      3307.64     3104.66
> > Duration Elapsed     4537.54     4604.73
> > 
> > The SPECcpu remote node access issue disappears with the patch applied.
> > 
> > Fixes: fc137c0ddab2 ("sched/numa: enhance vma scanning logic")
> > Reported-by: Xiaoping Zhou <xiaoping.zhou@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-and-tested-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@amd.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yujie Liu <yujie.liu@intel.com>
> 
> Ok, I didn't exactly replicate the autonuma test results but then again,
> I'd be a little surprised it was affected by this issue. The rescan
> decision is a bit arbitrary but I see no obviously better alternative
> and the patch is fixing an important corner case so
> 
> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> 
> Sorry for the long delay in reviewing, my backlog for upstream work is
> insane :(

Thanks a lot for your time to review this patch.

Best Regards,
Yujie

      parent reply	other threads:[~2024-08-22  1:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-05  8:22 Yujie Liu
2024-08-21 10:04 ` Mel Gorman
2024-08-22  1:36   ` Chen Yu
2024-08-22  1:48   ` Liu, Yujie [this message]

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=235394aee595eaefd4bd442d00201ab44cd47de1.camel@intel.com \
    --to=yujie.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=raghavendra.kt@amd.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=xiaoping.zhou@intel.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=yu.chen.surf@gmail.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®