[PATCH 00/14] Reduce preallocations for maple tree
Yin Fengwei
fengwei.yin at intel.com
Sun Jun 4 21:41:37 PDT 2023
Hi Peng,
On 6/5/23 11:28, Peng Zhang wrote:
>
>
> 在 2023/6/2 16:10, Yin, Fengwei 写道:
>> Hi Liam,
>>
>> On 6/1/2023 10:15 AM, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>>> Initial work on preallocations showed no regression in performance
>>> during testing, but recently some users (both on [1] and off [android]
>>> list) have reported that preallocating the worst-case number of nodes
>>> has caused some slow down. This patch set addresses the number of
>>> allocations in a few ways.
>>>
>>> During munmap() most munmap() operations will remove a single VMA, so
>>> leverage the fact that the maple tree can place a single pointer at
>>> range 0 - 0 without allocating. This is done by changing the index in
>>> the 'sidetree'.
>>>
>>> Re-introduce the entry argument to mas_preallocate() so that a more
>>> intelligent guess of the node count can be made.
>>>
>>> Patches are in the following order:
>>> 0001-0002: Testing framework for benchmarking some operations
>>> 0003-0004: Reduction of maple node allocation in sidetree
>>> 0005: Small cleanup of do_vmi_align_munmap()
>>> 0006-0013: mas_preallocate() calculation change
>>> 0014: Change the vma iterator order
>> I did run The AIM:page_test on an IceLake 48C/96T + 192G RAM platform with
>> this patchset.
>>
>> The result has a little bit improvement:
>> Base (next-20230602):
>> 503880
>> Base with this patchset:
>> 519501
>>
>> But they are far from the none-regression result (commit 7be1c1a3c7b1):
>> 718080
>>
>>
>> Some other information I collected:
>> With Base, the mas_alloc_nodes are always hit with request: 7.
>> With this patchset, the request are 1 or 5.
>>
>> I suppose this is the reason for improvement from 503880 to 519501.
>>
>> With commit 7be1c1a3c7b1, mas_store_gfp() in do_brk_flags never triggered
>> mas_alloc_nodes() call. Thanks.
> Hi Fengwei,
>
> I think it may be related to the inaccurate number of nodes allocated
> in the pre-allocation. I slightly modified the pre-allocation in this
> patchset, but I don't know if it works. It would be great if you could
> help test it, and help pinpoint the cause. Below is the diff, which can
> be applied based on this pachset.
I tried the patch, it could eliminate the call of mas_alloc_nodes() during
the test. But the result of benchmark got a little bit improvement:
529040
But it's still much less than none-regression result. I will also double
confirm the none-regression result.
Regards
Yin, Fengwei
>
> Thanks,
> Peng
>
> diff --git a/lib/maple_tree.c b/lib/maple_tree.c
> index 5ea211c3f186..e67bf2744384 100644
> --- a/lib/maple_tree.c
> +++ b/lib/maple_tree.c
> @@ -5575,9 +5575,11 @@ int mas_preallocate(struct ma_state *mas, void *entry, gfp_t gfp)
> goto ask_now;
> }
>
> - /* New root needs a singe node */
> - if (unlikely(mte_is_root(mas->node)))
> - goto ask_now;
> + if ((node_size == wr_mas.node_end + 1 &&
> + mas->offset == wr_mas.node_end) ||
> + (node_size == wr_mas.node_end &&
> + wr_mas.offset_end - mas->offset == 1))
> + return 0;
>
> /* Potential spanning rebalance collapsing a node, use worst-case */
> if (node_size - 1 <= mt_min_slots[wr_mas.type])
> @@ -5590,7 +5592,6 @@ int mas_preallocate(struct ma_state *mas, void *entry, gfp_t gfp)
> if (likely(!mas_is_err(mas)))
> return 0;
>
> - mas_set_alloc_req(mas, 0);
> ret = xa_err(mas->node);
> mas_reset(mas);
> mas_destroy(mas);
>
>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Yin, Fengwei
>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202305061457.ac15990c-yujie.liu@intel.com/
>>>
>>> Liam R. Howlett (14):
>>> maple_tree: Add benchmarking for mas_for_each
>>> maple_tree: Add benchmarking for mas_prev()
>>> mm: Move unmap_vmas() declaration to internal header
>>> mm: Change do_vmi_align_munmap() side tree index
>>> mm: Remove prev check from do_vmi_align_munmap()
>>> maple_tree: Introduce __mas_set_range()
>>> mm: Remove re-walk from mmap_region()
>>> maple_tree: Re-introduce entry to mas_preallocate() arguments
>>> mm: Use vma_iter_clear_gfp() in nommu
>>> mm: Set up vma iterator for vma_iter_prealloc() calls
>>> maple_tree: Move mas_wr_end_piv() below mas_wr_extend_null()
>>> maple_tree: Update mas_preallocate() testing
>>> maple_tree: Refine mas_preallocate() node calculations
>>> mm/mmap: Change vma iteration order in do_vmi_align_munmap()
>>>
>>> fs/exec.c | 1 +
>>> include/linux/maple_tree.h | 23 ++++-
>>> include/linux/mm.h | 4 -
>>> lib/maple_tree.c | 78 ++++++++++----
>>> lib/test_maple_tree.c | 74 +++++++++++++
>>> mm/internal.h | 40 ++++++--
>>> mm/memory.c | 16 ++-
>>> mm/mmap.c | 171 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>>> mm/nommu.c | 45 ++++----
>>> tools/testing/radix-tree/maple.c | 59 ++++++-----
>>> 10 files changed, 331 insertions(+), 180 deletions(-)
>>>
More information about the maple-tree
mailing list