Re: [PATCH 0/5] Speed up mremap on large regions

[Kalesh Singh]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 8:27 AM Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 03:42:17PM -0700, Lokesh Gidra wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 3:32 PM Kirill A. Shutemov
> > <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:21:17PM +0000, Kalesh Singh wrote:
> > > > mremap time can be optimized by moving entries at the PMD/PUD level if
> > > > the source and destination addresses are PMD/PUD-aligned and
> > > > PMD/PUD-sized. Enable moving at the PMD and PUD levels on arm64 and
> > > > x86. Other architectures where this type of move is supported and known to
> > > > be safe can also opt-in to these optimizations by enabling HAVE_MOVE_PMD
> > > > and HAVE_MOVE_PUD.
> > > >
> > > > Observed Performance Improvements for remapping a PUD-aligned 1GB-sized
> > > > region on x86 and arm64:
> > > >
> > > >     - HAVE_MOVE_PMD is already enabled on x86 : N/A
> > > >     - Enabling HAVE_MOVE_PUD on x86   : ~13x speed up
> > > >
> > > >     - Enabling HAVE_MOVE_PMD on arm64 : ~ 8x speed up
> > > >     - Enabling HAVE_MOVE_PUD on arm64 : ~19x speed up
> > > >
> > > >           Altogether, HAVE_MOVE_PMD and HAVE_MOVE_PUD
> > > >           give a total of ~150x speed up on arm64.
> > >
> > > Is there a *real* workload that benefit from HAVE_MOVE_PUD?
> > >
> > We have a Java garbage collector under development which requires
> > moving physical pages of multi-gigabyte heap using mremap. During this
> > move, the application threads have to be paused for correctness. It is
> > critical to keep this pause as short as possible to avoid jitters
> > during user interaction. This is where HAVE_MOVE_PUD will greatly
> > help.
>
> Any chance to quantify the effect of mremap() with and without
> HAVE_MOVE_PUD?
>
> I doubt it's a major contributor to the GC pause. I expect you need to
> move tens of gigs to get sizable effect. And if your GC routinely moves
> tens of gigs, maybe problem somewhere else?
>
> I'm asking for numbers, because increase in complexity comes with cost.
> If it doesn't provide an substantial benefit to a real workload
> maintaining the code forever doesn't make sense.

Lokesh on this thread would be better able to answer this. I'll let
him weigh in here.
Thanks, Kalesh
>
> --
>  Kirill A. Shutemov
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kernel-team+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx.
>