Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/page_alloc: Allow high-order pages to be stored on the per-cpu lists

From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer
Date: Mon May 31 2021 - 12:59:52 EST


On Mon, 31 May 2021 13:04:12 +0100
Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The per-cpu page allocator (PCP) only stores order-0 pages. This means
> that all THP and "cheap" high-order allocations including SLUB contends
> on the zone->lock. This patch extends the PCP allocator to store THP and
> "cheap" high-order pages. Note that struct per_cpu_pages increases in
> size to 256 bytes (4 cache lines) on x86-64.
>
> Note that this is not necessarily a universal performance win because of
> how it is implemented. High-order pages can cause pcp->high to be exceeded
> prematurely for lower-orders so for example, a large number of THP pages
> being freed could release order-0 pages from the PCP lists. Hence, much
> depends on the allocation/free pattern as observed by a single CPU to
> determine if caching helps or hurts a particular workload.
>
> That said, basic performance testing passed. The following is a netperf
> UDP_STREAM test which hits the relevant patches as some of the network
> allocations are high-order.

This series[1] looks very interesting! I confirm that some network
allocations do use high-order allocations. Thus, I think this will
increase network performance in general, like you confirm below:

> netperf-udp
> 5.13.0-rc2 5.13.0-rc2
> mm-pcpburst-v3r4 mm-pcphighorder-v1r7
> Hmean send-64 261.46 ( 0.00%) 266.30 * 1.85%*
> Hmean send-128 516.35 ( 0.00%) 536.78 * 3.96%*
> Hmean send-256 1014.13 ( 0.00%) 1034.63 * 2.02%*
> Hmean send-1024 3907.65 ( 0.00%) 4046.11 * 3.54%*
> Hmean send-2048 7492.93 ( 0.00%) 7754.85 * 3.50%*
> Hmean send-3312 11410.04 ( 0.00%) 11772.32 * 3.18%*
> Hmean send-4096 13521.95 ( 0.00%) 13912.34 * 2.89%*
> Hmean send-8192 21660.50 ( 0.00%) 22730.72 * 4.94%*
> Hmean send-16384 31902.32 ( 0.00%) 32637.50 * 2.30%*
>
> From a functional point of view, a patch like this is necessary to
> make bulk allocation of high-order pages work with similar performance
> to order-0 bulk allocations. The bulk allocator is not updated in this
> series as it would have to be determined by bulk allocation users how
> they want to track the order of pages allocated with the bulk allocator.

Thanks for working on this Mel, it is great to see! :-)

Message-Id: <20210531120412.17411-3-mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210531120412.17411-3-mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer