lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v12 00/31] Speculative page faults
Date
Le 06/06/2019 à 08:51, Haiyan Song a écrit :
> Hi Laurent,
>
> Regression test for v12 patch serials have been run on Intel 2s skylake platform,
> some regressions were found by LKP-tools (linux kernel performance). Only tested the
> cases that have been run and found regressions on v11 patch serials.
>
> Get the patch serials from https://github.com/ldu4/linux/tree/spf-v12.
> Kernel commit:
> base: a297558ad4479e0c9c5c14f3f69fe43113f72d1c (v5.1-rc4-mmotm-2019-04-09-17-51)
> head: 02c5a1f984a8061d075cfd74986ac8aa01d81064 (spf-v12)
>
> Benchmark: will-it-scale
> Download link: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/tree/master
> Metrics: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops=threads/nr_cpu
> test box: lkp-skl-2sp8(nr_cpu=72,memory=192G)
> THP: enable / disable
> nr_task: 100%
>
> The following is benchmark results, tested 4 times for every case.
>
> a). Enable THP
> base %stddev change head %stddev
> will-it-scale.page_fault3.per_thread_ops 63216 ±3% -16.9% 52537 ±4%
> will-it-scale.page_fault2.per_thread_ops 36862 -9.8% 33256
>
> b). Disable THP
> base %stddev change head %stddev
> will-it-scale.page_fault3.per_thread_ops 65111 -18.6% 53023 ±2%
> will-it-scale.page_fault2.per_thread_ops 38164 -12.0% 33565

Hi Haiyan,

Thanks for running this tests on your systems.

I did the same tests on my systems (x86 and PowerPc) and I didn't get the same numbers.
My x86 system has lower CPUs but larger memory amount but I don't think this impacts
a lot since my numbers are far from yours.

x86_64 48CPUs 755G
5.1.0-rc4-mm1 5.1.0-rc4-mm1-spf
page_fault2_threads SPF OFF SPF ON
THP always 2200902.3 [5%] 2152618.8 -2% [4%] 2136316 -3% [7%]
THP never 2185616.5 [6%] 2099274.2 -4% [3%] 2123275.1 -3% [7%]

5.1.0-rc4-mm1 5.1.0-rc4-mm1-spf
page_fault3_threads SPF OFF SPF ON
THP always 2700078.7 [5%] 2789437.1 +3% [4%] 2944806.8 +12% [3%]
THP never 2625756.7 [4%] 2944806.8 +12% [8%] 2876525.5 +10% [4%]

PowerPC P8 80CPUs 31G
5.1.0-rc4-mm1 5.1.0-rc4-mm1-spf
page_fault2_threads SPF OFF SPF ON
THP always 171732 [0%] 170762.8 -1% [0%] 170450.9 -1% [0%]
THP never 171808.4 [0%] 170600.3 -1% [0%] 170231.6 -1% [0%]

5.1.0-rc4-mm1 5.1.0-rc4-mm1-spf
page_fault3_threads SPF OFF SPF ON
THP always 2499.6 [13%] 2624.5 +5% [11%] 2734.5 +9% [3%]
THP never 2732.5 [2%] 2791.1 +2% [1%] 2695 -3% [4%]

Numbers in bracket are the standard deviation percent.

I run each test 10 times and then compute the average and deviation.

Please find attached the script I run to get these numbers.
This would be nice if you could give it a try on your victim node and share the result.

Thanks,
Laurent.

> Best regards,
> Haiyan Song
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 03:44:51PM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> This is a port on kernel 5.1 of the work done by Peter Zijlstra to handle
>> page fault without holding the mm semaphore [1].
>>
>> The idea is to try to handle user space page faults without holding the
>> mmap_sem. This should allow better concurrency for massively threaded
>> process since the page fault handler will not wait for other threads memory
>> layout change to be done, assuming that this change is done in another part
>> of the process's memory space. This type of page fault is named speculative
>> page fault. If the speculative page fault fails because a concurrency has
>> been detected or because underlying PMD or PTE tables are not yet
>> allocating, it is failing its processing and a regular page fault is then
>> tried.
>>
>> The speculative page fault (SPF) has to look for the VMA matching the fault
>> address without holding the mmap_sem, this is done by protecting the MM RB
>> tree with RCU and by using a reference counter on each VMA. When fetching a
>> VMA under the RCU protection, the VMA's reference counter is incremented to
>> ensure that the VMA will not freed in our back during the SPF
>> processing. Once that processing is done the VMA's reference counter is
>> decremented. To ensure that a VMA is still present when walking the RB tree
>> locklessly, the VMA's reference counter is incremented when that VMA is
>> linked in the RB tree. When the VMA is unlinked from the RB tree, its
>> reference counter will be decremented at the end of the RCU grace period,
>> ensuring it will be available during this time. This means that the VMA
>> freeing could be delayed and could delay the file closing for file
>> mapping. Since the SPF handler is not able to manage file mapping, file is
>> closed synchronously and not during the RCU cleaning. This is safe since
>> the page fault handler is aborting if a file pointer is associated to the
>> VMA.
>>
>> Using RCU fixes the overhead seen by Haiyan Song using the will-it-scale
>> benchmark [2].
>>
>> The VMA's attributes checked during the speculative page fault processing
>> have to be protected against parallel changes. This is done by using a per
>> VMA sequence lock. This sequence lock allows the speculative page fault
>> handler to fast check for parallel changes in progress and to abort the
>> speculative page fault in that case.
>>
>> Once the VMA has been found, the speculative page fault handler would check
>> for the VMA's attributes to verify that the page fault has to be handled
>> correctly or not. Thus, the VMA is protected through a sequence lock which
>> allows fast detection of concurrent VMA changes. If such a change is
>> detected, the speculative page fault is aborted and a *classic* page fault
>> is tried. VMA sequence lockings are added when VMA attributes which are
>> checked during the page fault are modified.
>>
>> When the PTE is fetched, the VMA is checked to see if it has been changed,
>> so once the page table is locked, the VMA is valid, so any other changes
>> leading to touching this PTE will need to lock the page table, so no
>> parallel change is possible at this time.
>>
>> The locking of the PTE is done with interrupts disabled, this allows
>> checking for the PMD to ensure that there is not an ongoing collapsing
>> operation. Since khugepaged is firstly set the PMD to pmd_none and then is
>> waiting for the other CPU to have caught the IPI interrupt, if the pmd is
>> valid at the time the PTE is locked, we have the guarantee that the
>> collapsing operation will have to wait on the PTE lock to move
>> forward. This allows the SPF handler to map the PTE safely. If the PMD
>> value is different from the one recorded at the beginning of the SPF
>> operation, the classic page fault handler will be called to handle the
>> operation while holding the mmap_sem. As the PTE lock is done with the
>> interrupts disabled, the lock is done using spin_trylock() to avoid dead
>> lock when handling a page fault while a TLB invalidate is requested by
>> another CPU holding the PTE.
>>
>> In pseudo code, this could be seen as:
>> speculative_page_fault()
>> {
>> vma = find_vma_rcu()
>> check vma sequence count
>> check vma's support
>> disable interrupt
>> check pgd,p4d,...,pte
>> save pmd and pte in vmf
>> save vma sequence counter in vmf
>> enable interrupt
>> check vma sequence count
>> handle_pte_fault(vma)
>> ..
>> page = alloc_page()
>> pte_map_lock()
>> disable interrupt
>> abort if sequence counter has changed
>> abort if pmd or pte has changed
>> pte map and lock
>> enable interrupt
>> if abort
>> free page
>> abort
>> ...
>> put_vma(vma)
>> }
>>
>> arch_fault_handler()
>> {
>> if (speculative_page_fault(&vma))
>> goto done
>> again:
>> lock(mmap_sem)
>> vma = find_vma();
>> handle_pte_fault(vma);
>> if retry
>> unlock(mmap_sem)
>> goto again;
>> done:
>> handle fault error
>> }
>>
>> Support for THP is not done because when checking for the PMD, we can be
>> confused by an in progress collapsing operation done by khugepaged. The
>> issue is that pmd_none() could be true either if the PMD is not already
>> populated or if the underlying PTE are in the way to be collapsed. So we
>> cannot safely allocate a PMD if pmd_none() is true.
>>
>> This series add a new software performance event named 'speculative-faults'
>> or 'spf'. It counts the number of successful page fault event handled
>> speculatively. When recording 'faults,spf' events, the faults one is
>> counting the total number of page fault events while 'spf' is only counting
>> the part of the faults processed speculatively.
>>
>> There are some trace events introduced by this series. They allow
>> identifying why the page faults were not processed speculatively. This
>> doesn't take in account the faults generated by a monothreaded process
>> which directly processed while holding the mmap_sem. This trace events are
>> grouped in a system named 'pagefault', they are:
>>
>> - pagefault:spf_vma_changed : if the VMA has been changed in our back
>> - pagefault:spf_vma_noanon : the vma->anon_vma field was not yet set.
>> - pagefault:spf_vma_notsup : the VMA's type is not supported
>> - pagefault:spf_vma_access : the VMA's access right are not respected
>> - pagefault:spf_pmd_changed : the upper PMD pointer has changed in our
>> back.
>>
>> To record all the related events, the easier is to run perf with the
>> following arguments :
>> $ perf stat -e 'faults,spf,pagefault:*' <command>
>>
>> There is also a dedicated vmstat counter showing the number of successful
>> page fault handled speculatively. I can be seen this way:
>> $ grep speculative_pgfault /proc/vmstat
>>
>> It is possible to deactivate the speculative page fault handler by echoing
>> 0 in /proc/sys/vm/speculative_page_fault.
>>
>> This series builds on top of v5.1-rc4-mmotm-2019-04-09-17-51 and is
>> functional on x86, PowerPC. I cross built it on arm64 but I was not able to
>> test it.
>>
>> This series is also available on github [4].
>>
>> ---------------------
>> Real Workload results
>>
>> Test using a "popular in memory multithreaded database product" on 128cores
>> SMT8 Power system are in progress and I will come back with performance
>> mesurement as soon as possible. With the previous series we seen up to 30%
>> improvements in the number of transaction processed per second, and we hope
>> this will be the case with this series too.
>>
>> ------------------
>> Benchmarks results
>>
>> Base kernel is v5.1-rc4-mmotm-2019-04-09-17-51
>> SPF is BASE + this series
>>
>> Kernbench:
>> ----------
>> Here are the results on a 48 CPUs X86 system using kernbench on a 5.0
>> kernel (kernel is build 5 times):
>>
>> Average Half load -j 24
>> Run (std deviation)
>> BASE SPF
>> Elapsed Time 56.52 (1.39185) 56.256 (1.15106) 0.47%
>> User Time 980.018 (2.94734) 984.958 (1.98518) -0.50%
>> System Time 130.744 (1.19148) 133.616 (0.873573) -2.20%
>> Percent CPU 1965.6 (49.682) 1988.4 (40.035) -1.16%
>> Context Switches 29926.6 (272.789) 30472.4 (109.569) -1.82%
>> Sleeps 124793 (415.87) 125003 (591.008) -0.17%
>>
>> Average Optimal load -j 48
>> Run (std deviation)
>> BASE SPF
>> Elapsed Time 46.354 (0.917949) 45.968 (1.42786) 0.83%
>> User Time 1193.42 (224.96) 1196.78 (223.28) -0.28%
>> System Time 143.306 (13.2726) 146.177 (13.2659) -2.00%
>> Percent CPU 2668.6 (743.157) 2699.9 (753.767) -1.17%
>> Context Switches 62268.3 (34097.1) 62721.7 (33999.1) -0.73%
>> Sleeps 132556 (8222.99) 132607 (8077.6) -0.04%
>>
>> During a run on the SPF, perf events were captured:
>> Performance counter stats for '../kernbench -M':
>> 525,873,132 faults
>> 242 spf
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
>> 441 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
>> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>>
>> Very few speculative page faults were recorded as most of the processes
>> involved are monothreaded (sounds that on this architecture some threads
>> were created during the kernel build processing).
>>
>> Here are the kerbench results on a 1024 CPUs Power8 VM:
>>
>> 5.1.0-rc4-mm1+ 5.1.0-rc4-mm1-spf-rcu+
>> Average Half load -j 512 Run (std deviation):
>> Elapsed Time 52.52 (0.906697) 52.778 (0.510069) -0.49%
>> User Time 3855.43 (76.378) 3890.44 (73.0466) -0.91%
>> System Time 1977.24 (182.316) 1974.56 (166.097) 0.14%
>> Percent CPU 11111.6 (540.461) 11115.2 (458.907) -0.03%
>> Context Switches 83245.6 (3061.44) 83651.8 (1202.31) -0.49%
>> Sleeps 613459 (23091.8) 628378 (27485.2) -2.43%
>>
>> Average Optimal load -j 1024 Run (std deviation):
>> Elapsed Time 52.964 (0.572346) 53.132 (0.825694) -0.32%
>> User Time 4058.22 (222.034) 4070.2 (201.646) -0.30%
>> System Time 2672.81 (759.207) 2712.13 (797.292) -1.47%
>> Percent CPU 12756.7 (1786.35) 12806.5 (1858.89) -0.39%
>> Context Switches 88818.5 (6772) 87890.6 (5567.72) 1.04%
>> Sleeps 618658 (20842.2) 636297 (25044) -2.85%
>>
>> During a run on the SPF, perf events were captured:
>> Performance counter stats for '../kernbench -M':
>> 149 375 832 faults
>> 1 spf
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
>> 561 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
>> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>>
>> Most of the processes involved are monothreaded so SPF is not activated but
>> there is no impact on the performance.
>>
>> Ebizzy:
>> -------
>> The test is counting the number of records per second it can manage, the
>> higher is the best. I run it like this 'ebizzy -mTt <nrcpus>'. To get
>> consistent result I repeated the test 100 times and measure the average
>> result. The number is the record processes per second, the higher is the best.
>>
>> BASE SPF delta
>> 24 CPUs x86 5492.69 9383.07 70.83%
>> 1024 CPUS P8 VM 8476.74 17144.38 102%
>>
>> Here are the performance counter read during a run on a 48 CPUs x86 node:
>> Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -mTt 48':
>> 11,846,569 faults
>> 10,886,706 spf
>> 957,702 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
>> 815 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
>> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>>
>> And the ones captured during a run on a 1024 CPUs Power VM:
>> Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -mTt 1024':
>> 1 359 789 faults
>> 1 284 910 spf
>> 72 085 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
>> 2 669 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
>> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
>> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>>
>> In ebizzy's case most of the page fault were handled in a speculative way,
>> leading the ebizzy performance boost.
>>
>> ------------------
>> Changes since v11 [3]
>> - Check vm_ops.fault instead of vm_ops since now all the VMA as a vm_ops.
>> - Abort speculative page fault when doing swap readhead because VMA's
>> boundaries are not protected at this time. Doing this the first swap in
>> is doing a readhead, the next fault should be handled in a speculative
>> way as the page is present in the swap read page.
>> - Handle a race between copy_pte_range() and the wp_page_copy called by
>> the speculative page fault handler.
>> - Ported to Kernel v5.0
>> - Moved VM_FAULT_PTNOTSAME define in mm_types.h
>> - Use RCU to protect the MM RB tree instead of a rwlock.
>> - Add a toggle interface: /proc/sys/vm/speculative_page_fault
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20141020215633.717315139@infradead.org/
>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/9FE19350E8A7EE45B64D8D63D368C8966B847F54@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com/
>> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1526555193-7242-1-git-send-email-ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com/
>> [4] https://github.com/ldu4/linux/tree/spf-v12
>>
>> Laurent Dufour (25):
>> mm: introduce CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT
>> x86/mm: define ARCH_SUPPORTS_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT
>> powerpc/mm: set ARCH_SUPPORTS_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT
>> mm: introduce pte_spinlock for FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE
>> mm: make pte_unmap_same compatible with SPF
>> mm: introduce INIT_VMA()
>> mm: protect VMA modifications using VMA sequence count
>> mm: protect mremap() against SPF hanlder
>> mm: protect SPF handler against anon_vma changes
>> mm: cache some VMA fields in the vm_fault structure
>> mm/migrate: Pass vm_fault pointer to migrate_misplaced_page()
>> mm: introduce __lru_cache_add_active_or_unevictable
>> mm: introduce __vm_normal_page()
>> mm: introduce __page_add_new_anon_rmap()
>> mm: protect against PTE changes done by dup_mmap()
>> mm: protect the RB tree with a sequence lock
>> mm: introduce vma reference counter
>> mm: Introduce find_vma_rcu()
>> mm: don't do swap readahead during speculative page fault
>> mm: adding speculative page fault failure trace events
>> perf: add a speculative page fault sw event
>> perf tools: add support for the SPF perf event
>> mm: add speculative page fault vmstats
>> powerpc/mm: add speculative page fault
>> mm: Add a speculative page fault switch in sysctl
>>
>> Mahendran Ganesh (2):
>> arm64/mm: define ARCH_SUPPORTS_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT
>> arm64/mm: add speculative page fault
>>
>> Peter Zijlstra (4):
>> mm: prepare for FAULT_FLAG_SPECULATIVE
>> mm: VMA sequence count
>> mm: provide speculative fault infrastructure
>> x86/mm: add speculative pagefault handling
>>
>> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 +
>> arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 12 +
>> arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 1 +
>> arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 16 +
>> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 +
>> arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 14 +
>> fs/exec.c | 1 +
>> fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 5 +-
>> fs/userfaultfd.c | 17 +-
>> include/linux/hugetlb_inline.h | 2 +-
>> include/linux/migrate.h | 4 +-
>> include/linux/mm.h | 138 +++++-
>> include/linux/mm_types.h | 16 +-
>> include/linux/pagemap.h | 4 +-
>> include/linux/rmap.h | 12 +-
>> include/linux/swap.h | 10 +-
>> include/linux/vm_event_item.h | 3 +
>> include/trace/events/pagefault.h | 80 ++++
>> include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 1 +
>> kernel/fork.c | 35 +-
>> kernel/sysctl.c | 9 +
>> mm/Kconfig | 22 +
>> mm/huge_memory.c | 6 +-
>> mm/hugetlb.c | 2 +
>> mm/init-mm.c | 3 +
>> mm/internal.h | 45 ++
>> mm/khugepaged.c | 5 +
>> mm/madvise.c | 6 +-
>> mm/memory.c | 631 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
>> mm/mempolicy.c | 51 ++-
>> mm/migrate.c | 6 +-
>> mm/mlock.c | 13 +-
>> mm/mmap.c | 249 ++++++++--
>> mm/mprotect.c | 4 +-
>> mm/mremap.c | 13 +
>> mm/nommu.c | 1 +
>> mm/rmap.c | 5 +-
>> mm/swap.c | 6 +-
>> mm/swap_state.c | 10 +-
>> mm/vmstat.c | 5 +-
>> tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 1 +
>> tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 1 +
>> tools/perf/util/parse-events.c | 4 +
>> tools/perf/util/parse-events.l | 1 +
>> tools/perf/util/python.c | 1 +
>> 45 files changed, 1277 insertions(+), 196 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 include/trace/events/pagefault.h
>>
>> --
>> 2.21.0
>>

[unhandled content-type:application/x-sh]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-14 10:39    [W:0.763 / U:0.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site