Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] rcu/kvfree: Update KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES interval

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Wed Jun 29 2022 - 12:13:22 EST

Next message: Jason A. Donenfeld: "Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID"
Previous message: James Houghton: "Re: [RFC PATCH 12/26] hugetlb: add HugeTLB splitting functionality"
In reply to: Uladzislau Rezki: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] rcu/kvfree: Update KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES interval"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:02:18PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 01:45:31PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 09:53:53PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> > > > Currently the monitor work is scheduled with a fixed interval that
> > > > is HZ/20 or each 50 milliseconds. The drawback of such approach is
> > > > a low utilization of page slot in some scenarios. The page can store
> > > > up to 512 records. For example on Android system it can look like:
> > >
> > > I was looking at queuing this one, but we need a bit more data. In
> > > the meantime, here is my wordsmithing of the above paragraph:
> > >
> > > Currently the monitor work is scheduled with a fixed interval of HZ/20,
> > > which is roughly 50 milliseconds. The drawback of this approach is
> > > low utilization of the 512 page slots in scenarios with infrequence
> > > kvfree_rcu() calls. For example on an Android system:
> > >
> > Good i will update with your changes :)
> >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > kworker/3:0-13872 [003] .... 11286.007048: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000026522604 nr_records=1
> > > > kworker/3:0-13872 [003] .... 11286.015638: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000095ed6fca nr_records=2
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.051230: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000044872ffd nr_records=1
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.059322: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000026522604 nr_records=2
> > > > kworker/0:1-20052 [000] .... 11286.095295: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000044872ffd nr_records=2
> > > > kworker/0:1-20052 [000] .... 11286.103418: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000cbcf05db nr_records=1
> > > > kworker/2:3-14372 [002] .... 11286.135155: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000095ed6fca nr_records=2
> > > > kworker/2:3-14372 [002] .... 11286.135198: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000044872ffd nr_records=1
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.155377: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000cbcf05db nr_records=5
> > > > kworker/2:3-14372 [002] .... 11286.167181: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000026522604 nr_records=5
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.179202: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000008ef95e14 nr_records=1
> > > > kworker/2:3-14372 [002] .... 11286.187398: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000c597d297 nr_records=6
> > > > kworker/3:0-13872 [003] .... 11286.187445: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000050bf92e2 nr_records=3
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.198975: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000cbcf05db nr_records=4
> > > > kworker/1:2-20434 [001] .... 11286.207203: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000095ed6fca nr_records=4
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > where a page only carries few records to reclaim a memory. In order
> > > > to improve batching and make utilization more efficient the patch sets
> > > > a drain interval to 1 second as default one. When a flood is detected
> > > > an interval is adjusted in a way that a reclaim work is re-scheduled
> > > > on a next timer jiffy.
> > >
> > > And of the above paragraph:
> > >
> > > Out of 512 slots, in all cases, fewer than 10 were actually used.
> > > In order to improve batching and make utilization more efficient this
> > > commit sets a drain interval to a fixed 1-second interval. Floods are
> > > detected when a page fills quickly, and in that case, the reclaim work
> > > is re-scheduled for the next scheduling-clock tick (jiffy).
> > >
> > Same here, will apply this.
> >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > But what we need now is a trace like the one above showing higher utilization
> > > of the pages. Could you please supply this?
> > >
> > Yep, i will add traces to show that utilization becomes better what is
> > actually expectable.
> >
> > --
> > Uladzislau Rezki
> Paul, see below the v3:
>
> >From ff2a402a59442ba575f13f660ee1b140d44483b4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 11:28:53 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH v3 1/1] rcu/kvfree: Update KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES interval
>
> Currently the monitor work is scheduled with a fixed interval of HZ/20,
> which is roughly 50 milliseconds. The drawback of this approach is
> low utilization of the 512 page slots in scenarios with infrequence
> kvfree_rcu() calls. For example on an Android system:
>
> <snip>
> kworker/3:3-507 [003] .... 470.286305: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000d0f0dde5 nr_records=6
> kworker/6:1-76 [006] .... 470.416613: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000ea0d6556 nr_records=1
> kworker/6:1-76 [006] .... 470.416625: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000003e025849 nr_records=9
> kworker/1:1-73 [001] .... 470.438895: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000091a38dc1 nr_records=1
> kworker/3:3-507 [003] .... 471.390000: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000815a8713 nr_records=48
> kworker/1:1-73 [001] .... 471.725785: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000fda9bf20 nr_records=3
> kworker/1:1-73 [001] .... 471.725833: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000a425b67b nr_records=76
> kworker/3:3-507 [003] .... 471.958960: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000dce5bdbd nr_records=78
> kworker/0:4-1411 [000] .... 472.085673: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000007996be9d nr_records=1
> kworker/0:4-1411 [000] .... 472.085728: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000d0f0dde5 nr_records=5
> kworker/6:1-76 [006] .... 472.260340: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000065630ee4 nr_records=102
> kworker/2:1-78 [002] .... 472.527362: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x00000000815a8713 nr_records=1
> <snip>
>
> Out of 512 slots, in all cases, fewer than 10 were actually used.

Though with the re-run, this now needs to be something like "In many
cases, out of 512 slots, fewer than 10 were actually used."

> In order to improve batching and make utilization more efficient this
> commit sets a drain interval to a fixed 1-second interval. Floods are
> detected when a page fills quickly, and in that case, the reclaim work
> is re-scheduled for the next scheduling-clock tick (jiffy).
>
> After this change:
>
> <snip>
> kworker/0:5-1415 [000] .... 239.852727: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000005d2561ea nr_records=178
> kworker/3:0-38 [003] .... 239.855113: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000039c44d27 nr_records=93
> kworker/1:4-1747 [001] .... 239.872647: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000004abb2f7e nr_records=109
> kworker/4:59-288 [004] .... 239.884829: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000049e7a308 nr_records=182
> kworker/0:5-1415 [000] .... 240.028762: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000037eae6d6 nr_records=86
> kworker/3:0-38 [003] .... 240.040769: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000003be0ae55 nr_records=244
> kworker/3:0-38 [003] .... 240.068639: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000021905efe nr_records=45
> <...>-1415 [000] .... 240.868830: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000007c97e065 nr_records=461
> <...>-1415 [000] .... 241.068646: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000000725886e nr_records=25
> kworker/0:5-1415 [000] .... 241.100931: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x0000000021905efe nr_records=300
> worker/4:59-2880 [004] .... 241.801181: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000004abb2f7e nr_records=180
> worker/6:60-2554 [006] .... 242.000565: rcu_invoke_kfree_bulk_callback: rcu_preempt bulk=0x000000006d3084af nr_records=40
> <snip>

Much better! Looking forward to the updated patch.

Thanx, Paul

> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index fd16c0b46d9e..37f89bedf45e 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -3249,7 +3249,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(call_rcu);
>
>
> /* Maximum number of jiffies to wait before draining a batch. */
> -#define KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES (HZ / 50)
> +#define KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES (HZ)
> #define KFREE_N_BATCHES 2
> #define FREE_N_CHANNELS 2
>
> @@ -3510,6 +3510,25 @@ need_offload_krc(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
> return !!krcp->head;
> }
>
> +static void
> +schedule_delayed_monitor_work(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
> +{
> + long delay, delay_left;
> +
> + delay = READ_ONCE(krcp->count) >= KVFREE_BULK_MAX_ENTR ? 1:KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES;
> +
> + if (delayed_work_pending(&krcp->monitor_work)) {
> + delay_left = krcp->monitor_work.timer.expires - jiffies;
> +
> + if (delay < delay_left)
> + mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &krcp->monitor_work, delay);
> +
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + queue_delayed_work(system_wq, &krcp->monitor_work, delay);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * This function is invoked after the KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES timeout.
> */
> @@ -3567,7 +3586,7 @@ static void kfree_rcu_monitor(struct work_struct *work)
> // work to repeat an attempt. Because previous batches are
> // still in progress.
> if (need_offload_krc(krcp))
> - schedule_delayed_work(&krcp->monitor_work, KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES);
> + schedule_delayed_monitor_work(krcp);
>
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> }
> @@ -3755,7 +3774,7 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func)
>
> // Set timer to drain after KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES.
> if (rcu_scheduler_active == RCU_SCHEDULER_RUNNING)
> - schedule_delayed_work(&krcp->monitor_work, KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES);
> + schedule_delayed_monitor_work(krcp);
>
> unlock_return:
> krc_this_cpu_unlock(krcp, flags);
> @@ -3831,7 +3850,7 @@ void __init kfree_rcu_scheduler_running(void)
>
> raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&krcp->lock, flags);
> if (need_offload_krc(krcp))
> - schedule_delayed_work_on(cpu, &krcp->monitor_work, KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES);
> + schedule_delayed_monitor_work(krcp);
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> }
> }
> --
> 2.30.2

Next message: Jason A. Donenfeld: "Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID"
Previous message: James Houghton: "Re: [RFC PATCH 12/26] hugetlb: add HugeTLB splitting functionality"
In reply to: Uladzislau Rezki: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] rcu/kvfree: Update KFREE_DRAIN_JIFFIES interval"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]