| /openbmc/linux/include/linux/ |
| H A D | page-flags-layout.h | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| H A D | mm_inline.h | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| H A D | mmzone.h | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| /openbmc/linux/kernel/ |
| H A D | bounds.c | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| /openbmc/linux/mm/ |
| H A D | workingset.c | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| H A D | swap.c | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| H A D | Kconfig | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|
| H A D | vmscan.c | ac35a490 Sun Sep 18 03:00:03 CDT 2022 Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation
To avoid confusion, the terms "promotion" and "demotion" will be applied
to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "activation" and
"deactivation" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual.
The aging produces young generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
max_seq when max_seq-min_seq+1 approaches MIN_NR_GENS. The aging promotes
hot pages to the youngest generation when it finds them accessed through
page tables; the demotion of cold pages happens consequently when it
increments max_seq. Promotion in the aging path does not involve any LRU
list operations, only the updates of the gen counter and
lrugen->nr_pages[]; demotion, unless as the result of the increment of
max_seq, requires LRU list operations, e.g., lru_deactivate_fn(). The
aging has the complexity O(nr_hot_pages), since it is only interested in
hot pages.
The eviction consumes old generations. Given an lruvec, it increments
min_seq when lrugen->lists[] indexed by min_seq%MAX_NR_GENS becomes empty.
A feedback loop modeled after the PID controller monitors refaults over
anon and file types and decides which type to evict when both types are
available from the same generation.
The protection of pages accessed multiple times through file descriptors
takes place in the eviction path. Each generation is divided into
multiple tiers. A page accessed N times through file descriptors is in
tier order_base_2(N). Tiers do not have dedicated lrugen->lists[], only
bits in folio->flags. The aforementioned feedback loop also monitors
refaults over all tiers and decides when to protect pages in which tiers
(N>1), using the first tier (N=0,1) as a baseline. The first tier
contains single-use unmapped clean pages, which are most likely the best
choices. In contrast to promotion in the aging path, the protection of a
page in the eviction path is achieved by moving this page to the next
generation, i.e., min_seq+1, if the feedback loop decides so. This
approach has the following advantages:
1. It removes the cost of activation in the buffered access path by
inferring whether pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors are statistically hot and thus worth protecting in the
eviction path.
2. It takes pages accessed through page tables into account and avoids
overprotecting pages accessed multiple times through file
descriptors. (Pages accessed through page tables are in the first
tier, since N=0.)
3. More tiers provide better protection for pages accessed more than
twice through file descriptors, when under heavy buffered I/O
workloads.
Server benchmark results:
Single workload:
fio (buffered I/O): +[30, 32]%
IOPS BW
5.19-rc1: 2673k 10.2GiB/s
patch1-6: 3491k 13.3GiB/s
Single workload:
memcached (anon): -[4, 6]%
Ops/sec KB/sec
5.19-rc1: 1161501.04 45177.25
patch1-6: 1106168.46 43025.04
Configurations:
CPU: two Xeon 6154
Mem: total 256G
Node 1 was only used as a ram disk to reduce the variance in the
results.
patch drivers/block/brd.c <<EOF
99,100c99,100
< gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM;
< page = alloc_page(gfp_flags);
---
> gfp_flags = GFP_NOIO | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_THISNODE;
> page = alloc_pages_node(1, gfp_flags, 0);
EOF
cat >>/etc/systemd/system.conf <<EOF
CPUAffinity=numa
NUMAPolicy=bind
NUMAMask=0
EOF
cat >>/etc/memcached.conf <<EOF
-m 184320
-s /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock
-a 0766
-t 36
-B binary
EOF
cat fio.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkfs.ext4 /dev/ram0
mount -t ext4 /dev/ram0 /mnt
mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test
echo 38654705664 >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/memory.max
echo $$ >/sys/fs/cgroup/user.slice/test/cgroup.procs
fio -name=mglru --numjobs=72 --directory=/mnt --size=1408m \
--buffered=1 --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=128 \
--iodepth_batch_submit=32 --iodepth_batch_complete=32 \
--rw=randread --random_distribution=random --norandommap \
--time_based --ramp_time=10m --runtime=5m --group_reporting
cat memcached.sh
modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=113246208
swapoff -a
mkswap /dev/ram0
swapon /dev/ram0
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 2000
memtier_benchmark -S /var/run/memcached/memcached.sock \
-P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
--key-maximum=65000000 --key-pattern=R:R -c 1 -t 36 \
--ratio 0:1 --pipeline 8 --randomize --distinct-client-seed
Client benchmark results:
kswapd profiles:
5.19-rc1
40.33% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
21.80% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
7.53% do_raw_spin_lock
3.95% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
2.52% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
2.37% folio_referenced_one
2.28% vma_interval_tree_subtree_search
1.97% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.60% ptep_clear_flush
1.06% __zram_bvec_write
patch1-6
39.03% lzo1x_1_do_compress (real work)
18.47% page_vma_mapped_walk (overhead)
6.74% _raw_spin_unlock_irq
3.97% do_raw_spin_lock
2.49% ptep_clear_flush
2.48% anon_vma_interval_tree_iter_first
1.92% folio_referenced_one
1.88% __zram_bvec_write
1.48% memmove
1.31% vma_interval_tree_iter_next
Configurations:
CPU: single Snapdragon 7c
Mem: total 4G
ChromeOS MemoryPressure [1]
[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/tast-tests/
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-7-yuzhao@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>
Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org>
Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>
Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>
Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>
Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>
Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>
Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
|