On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 12:01:09PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
On 2023-04-18 07:21, Aaron Lu wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:08:31AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
Introduce per-mm/cpu current concurrency id (mm_cid) to fix a PostgreSQL
sysbench regression reported by Aaron Lu.
For postgres_sysbench on SPR:
sched_mm_cid_migrate_to() is in the range of 0.1x% - 0.4x%, mm_cid_get()
is in the range of 0.1x% - 0.3x%. Other cid functions are pretty minor.
For hackbench on SPR:
ched_mm_cid_migrate_to() is about 3%-4%, mm_cid_get() is about 7%-8%,
other cid functions are pretty minor.
It's a bit higher than I would have expected for hackbench.
Can you run with the attached schedstats patch applied and boot
with schedstats=enable ? Let me know how the counters behave please,
because I cannot reproduce anything unexpected on my machine.
Only event that stood out is mm_cid_get_cached, other events are very
few in a 5s window. I think these numbers are expected and indicate the
optimization worked well. Please see attachment for details, the number
are got by doing the following after 20s the test was started:
touch schedstat
cat /proc/schedstat >> schedstat
sleep 5
cat /proc/schedstat >> schedstat
However, mm_cid_get() still shows as having 7.x% in perf cycles.
Annotate shows the cycles are mostly spent on accessing mm->pcpu_cid:
│
│ lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
│ cpumask = mm_cidmask(mm);
│ pcpu_cid = this_cpu_ptr(mm->pcpu_cid);
64.50 │ mov 0x60(%r14),%r12
│ struct rq *rq = this_rq();
9.80 │ mov %rbx,-0x30(%rbp)
│ pcpu_cid = this_cpu_ptr(mm->pcpu_cid);
0.11 │ → call debug_smp_processor_id
│ mov %eax,%ebx
│ cmp $0x1fff,%eax
│ raw_spin_unlock(&cid_lock);
│ mov $0xffffffff8474ca84,%rdi
│ WRITE_ONCE(use_cid_lock, 0);
│ movl $0x0,use_cid_lock
│ raw_spin_unlock(&cid_lock);
│ → call _raw_spin_unlock
│ ↑ jmp fe
│ arch_static_branch():
0.02 │236: xchg %ax,%ax
│ mm_cid_snapshot_time():
│ struct rq *rq = this_rq();
│238: → call debug_smp_processor_id
│ mov $0x33340,%r13
│ mov %eax,%ebx
│ cmp $0x1fff,%eax
│ ↓ ja 2b3
│24d: add -0x7d5ce500(,%rbx,8),%r13
│ pcpu_cid = this_cpu_ptr(mm->pcpu_cid);
21.23 │ mov 0x60(%r14),%rbx
4.11 │ → call debug_smp_processor_id
│ mov %eax,%r12d
│ cmp $0x1fff,%eax
│ ↓ ja 2c4
│ WRITE_ONCE(pcpu_cid->time, rq->clock);
Initially I thought it might be due to some false sharing between
pcpu_cid field and other fields of mm_struct, but after I placed pcpu_cid
into a separate cacheline, it still didn't make a difference.
For sched_mm_cid_migrate_to(), its cycle percent is 2.97% and most cycles
are also spent on accessing mm->pcpu_cid according to perf annotate:
│ dst_pcpu_cid = per_cpu_ptr(mm->pcpu_cid, cpu_of(dst_rq));
64.22 │ mov 0x60(%r15),%r13
9.53 │ movslq 0xaf0(%rdi),%r14
No idea why accesing mm->pcpu_cid is so expensive, surely after
initial allocation, nobody would change its value? Without a write
side, I don't see how this can happen...