Re: [PATCH] memcg: replace ss->id_lock with a rwlock
From: Ying Han <hidden>
Date: 2011-08-24 04:10:35
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Johannes Weiner [off-list ref] wrote:
Hello Andrew, On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:20:33AM -0700, Andrew Bresticker wrote:quoted
While back-porting Johannes Weiner's patch "mm: memcg-aware globalreclaim"quoted
for an internal effort, we noticed a significant performance regression during page-reclaim heavy workloads due to high contention of thess->id_lock.quoted
This lock protects idr map, and serializes calls to idr_get_next() in css_get_next() (which is used during the memcg hierarchy walk). Since idr_get_next() is just doing a look up, we need only serialize it with respect to idr_remove()/idr_get_new(). By making the ss->id_lock a rwlock, contention is greatly reduced and performance improves. Tested: cat a 256m file from a ramdisk in a 128m container 50 times on each core (one file + container per core) in parallel on a NUMA machine. Result is the time for the test to complete in 1 of the containers. Both kernels included Johannes' memcg-aware global reclaim patches. Before rwlock patch: 1710.778s After rwlock patch: 152.227sThe reason why there is much more hierarchy walking going on is because there was actually a design bug in the hierarchy reclaim. The old code would pick one memcg and scan it at decreasing priority levels until SCAN_CLUSTER_MAX pages were reclaimed. For each memcg scanned with priority level 12, there were SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages reclaimed. My last revision would bail the whole hierarchy walk once it reclaimed SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX. Also, at the time, small memcgs were not force-scanned yet. So 128m containers would force the priority level to 10 before scanning anything at all (128M / pagesize >> priority), and then bail after one or two scanned memcgs. This means that for each SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX reclaimed pages there was a nr_of_containers * 2 overhead of just walking the hierarchy to no avail.
Good point. To make it a bit clear, the revision which bails out the hierarchy_walk based on nr_reclaimed is that we are looking at right now.
I changed this and removed the bail condition based on the number of reclaimed pages. Instead, the cycle ends when all reclaimers together made a full round-trip through the hierarchy. The more cgroups, the more likely that there are several tasks going into reclaim concurrently, it should be a reasonable share of work for each one.
The number of reclaim invocations, thus the number of hierarchy walks,
is back to sane levels again and the id_lock contention should be less of an issue.
looking forward to see the change.
Your patch still makes sense, but it's probably less urgent.
I think the patch itself make senses regardless of the global reclaim change. It seems to be a optimization in general. --Ying