Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] mm/slub: Fix count_partial() problem

[Xunlei Pang]

On 3/1/21 6:31 PM, Shu Ming wrote:
> Any progress on this?  The problem addressed by this patch has also
> made jitters to our online apps which are quite annoying.
> 

Thanks for the attention.

There's some further improvements on v2, I'm gonna send v3 out later.

> On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:05 PM xunlei <xlpang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 2020/8/20 下午10:02, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 3:18 PM Xunlei Pang <xlpang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> v1->v2:
>>>> - Improved changelog and variable naming for PATCH 1~2.
>>>> - PATCH3 adds per-cpu counter to avoid performance regression
>>>>   in concurrent __slab_free().
>>>>
>>>> [Testing]
>>>> On my 32-cpu 2-socket physical machine:
>>>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650 v2 @ 2.60GHz
>>>> perf stat --null --repeat 10 -- hackbench 20 thread 20000
>>>>
>>>> == original, no patched
>>>>       19.211637055 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.57% )
>>>>
>>>> == patched with patch1~2
>>>>  Performance counter stats for 'hackbench 20 thread 20000' (10 runs):
>>>>
>>>>       21.731833146 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.17% )
>>>>
>>>> == patched with patch1~3
>>>>  Performance counter stats for 'hackbench 20 thread 20000' (10 runs):
>>>>
>>>>       19.112106847 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.64% )
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Xunlei Pang (3):
>>>>   mm/slub: Introduce two counters for partial objects
>>>>   mm/slub: Get rid of count_partial()
>>>>   mm/slub: Use percpu partial free counter
>>>>
>>>>  mm/slab.h |   2 +
>>>>  mm/slub.c | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>>>  2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> We probably need to wrap the counters under CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG because
>>> AFAICT all the code that uses them is also wrapped under it.
>>
>> /sys/kernel/slab/***/partial sysfs also uses it, I can wrap it with
>> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG or CONFIG_SYSFS for backward compatibility.
>>
>>>
>>> An alternative approach for this patch would be to somehow make the
>>> lock in count_partial() more granular, but I don't know how feasible
>>> that actually is.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I am OK with this approach:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>>
>>> You still need to convince Christoph, though, because he had
>>> objections over this approach.
>>
>> Christoph, what do you think, or any better suggestion to address this
>> *in production* issue?
>>
>>>
>>> - Pekka
>>>