From: Scott Cheloha <hidden> Date: 2020-09-15 19:48:50
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
In short, we have a pointer to an LMB and then we are searching for
that LMB *again* in order to find its nid.
If we call of_drconf_to_nid_single() directly from dlpar_add_lmb() we
can skip the redundant lookup. The only error handling we need to
duplicate from memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is the fallback to the
default nid when drconf_to_nid_single() returns -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) or
an invalid nid.
Skipping the extra lookup makes hot-add operations faster, especially
on machines with many LMBs.
Consider an LPAR with 126976 LMBs. In one test, hot-adding 126000
LMBs on an upatched kernel took ~3.5 hours while a patched kernel
completed the same operation in ~2 hours:
Unpatched (12450 seconds):
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[810169]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 9 07:34:01 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
Patched (7065 seconds):
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[877703]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 8 23:27:42 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
It should be noted that the speedup grows more substantial when
hot-adding LMBs at the end of the drconf range. This is because we
are skipping a linear LMB search.
To see the distinction, consider smaller hot-add test on the same
LPAR. A perf-stat run with 10 iterations showed that hot-adding 4096
LMBs completed less than 1 second faster on a patched kernel:
Unpatched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,753.42 msec task-clock # 0.992 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.55% )
4,708 context-switches # 0.045 K/sec ( +- 0.69% )
2,444 cpu-migrations # 0.023 K/sec ( +- 1.25% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.22% )
445,902,503,057 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.55% ) (66.67%)
8,558,376,740 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.92% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.88% ) (49.99%)
300,346,181,651 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.36% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.76% ) (50.01%)
258,091,488,691 instructions # 0.58 insn per cycle
# 1.16 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.22% ) (66.67%)
70,568,169,256 branches # 673.660 M/sec ( +- 0.17% ) (50.01%)
3,100,725,426 branch-misses # 4.39% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) (49.99%)
105.583 +- 0.589 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.56% )
Patched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,055.69 msec task-clock # 0.993 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.32% )
4,606 context-switches # 0.044 K/sec ( +- 0.20% )
2,463 cpu-migrations # 0.024 K/sec ( +- 0.93% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.25% )
442,951,129,921 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.32% ) (66.66%)
8,710,413,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.97% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.47% ) (50.06%)
299,656,905,836 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.65% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.39% ) (50.02%)
252,731,168,193 instructions # 0.57 insn per cycle
# 1.19 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.20% ) (66.66%)
68,902,851,121 branches # 662.173 M/sec ( +- 0.13% ) (49.94%)
3,100,242,882 branch-misses # 4.50% of all branches ( +- 0.15% ) (49.98%)
104.829 +- 0.325 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
This is consistent. An add-by-count hot-add operation adds LMBs
greedily, so LMBs near the start of the drconf range are considered
first. On an otherwise idle LPAR with so many LMBs we would expect to
find the LMBs we need near the start of the drconf range, hence the
smaller speedup.
Signed-off-by: Scott Cheloha <redacted>
---
Changelog:
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20200910175637.2865160-1-cheloha@linux.ibm.com/
v2:
- Move prototype for of_drconf_to_nid_single() to topology.h.
Requested by Michael Ellerman.
v3:
- Send the right patch. v2 is from the wrong branch, my mistake.
arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h | 3 +++
arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 2 +-
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c | 6 ++++--
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
@@ -611,8 +611,10 @@ static int dlpar_add_lmb(struct drmem_lmb *lmb)block_sz=memory_block_size_bytes();-/* Find the node id for this address. */-nid=memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(lmb->base_addr);+/* Find the node id for this LMB. Fake one if necessary. */+nid=of_drconf_to_nid_single(lmb);+if(nid<0||!node_possible(nid))+nid=first_online_node;/* Add the memory */rc=__add_memory(nid,lmb->base_addr,block_sz);
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden> Date: 2020-09-16 07:43:00
On 15.09.20 21:46, Scott Cheloha wrote:
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
In short, we have a pointer to an LMB and then we are searching for
that LMB *again* in order to find its nid.
If we call of_drconf_to_nid_single() directly from dlpar_add_lmb() we
can skip the redundant lookup. The only error handling we need to
duplicate from memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is the fallback to the
default nid when drconf_to_nid_single() returns -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) or
an invalid nid.
Skipping the extra lookup makes hot-add operations faster, especially
on machines with many LMBs.
Consider an LPAR with 126976 LMBs. In one test, hot-adding 126000
LMBs on an upatched kernel took ~3.5 hours while a patched kernel
completed the same operation in ~2 hours:
Unpatched (12450 seconds):
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[810169]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 9 07:34:01 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
Patched (7065 seconds):
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[877703]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 8 23:27:42 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
It should be noted that the speedup grows more substantial when
hot-adding LMBs at the end of the drconf range. This is because we
are skipping a linear LMB search.
To see the distinction, consider smaller hot-add test on the same
LPAR. A perf-stat run with 10 iterations showed that hot-adding 4096
LMBs completed less than 1 second faster on a patched kernel:
Unpatched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,753.42 msec task-clock # 0.992 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.55% )
4,708 context-switches # 0.045 K/sec ( +- 0.69% )
2,444 cpu-migrations # 0.023 K/sec ( +- 1.25% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.22% )
445,902,503,057 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.55% ) (66.67%)
8,558,376,740 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.92% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.88% ) (49.99%)
300,346,181,651 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.36% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.76% ) (50.01%)
258,091,488,691 instructions # 0.58 insn per cycle
# 1.16 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.22% ) (66.67%)
70,568,169,256 branches # 673.660 M/sec ( +- 0.17% ) (50.01%)
3,100,725,426 branch-misses # 4.39% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) (49.99%)
105.583 +- 0.589 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.56% )
Patched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,055.69 msec task-clock # 0.993 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.32% )
4,606 context-switches # 0.044 K/sec ( +- 0.20% )
2,463 cpu-migrations # 0.024 K/sec ( +- 0.93% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.25% )
442,951,129,921 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.32% ) (66.66%)
8,710,413,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.97% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.47% ) (50.06%)
299,656,905,836 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.65% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.39% ) (50.02%)
252,731,168,193 instructions # 0.57 insn per cycle
# 1.19 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.20% ) (66.66%)
68,902,851,121 branches # 662.173 M/sec ( +- 0.13% ) (49.94%)
3,100,242,882 branch-misses # 4.50% of all branches ( +- 0.15% ) (49.98%)
104.829 +- 0.325 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
This is consistent. An add-by-count hot-add operation adds LMBs
greedily, so LMBs near the start of the drconf range are considered
first. On an otherwise idle LPAR with so many LMBs we would expect to
find the LMBs we need near the start of the drconf range, hence the
smaller speedup.
Signed-off-by: Scott Cheloha <redacted>
Hi Scott,
IIRC, ppc DLPAR does a single add_memory() for each LMB (16 MB). With
tons of LMBs, this will also make /proc/iomem explode in size (using a a
list-based tree), making traversal significantly slower e.g., on
insertions and system ram walks.
I was wondering if you would get another performance boost under ppc
when using MEMHP_MERGE_RESOURCE [1]. AFAIKs, the resource boundaries are
not of interest. No guarantees, might be worth a try.
Did you investigate what else makes memory hotplug that slow? (126000
LMBs correspond to roughly 2TB, that shouldn't take 2 hours ...) Memory
block devices might still be a slowdown (although we have an xarray in
place now that takes care of most pain).
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200911103459.10306-1-david@redhat.com/
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
In short, we have a pointer to an LMB and then we are searching for
that LMB *again* in order to find its nid.
If we call of_drconf_to_nid_single() directly from dlpar_add_lmb() we
can skip the redundant lookup. The only error handling we need to
duplicate from memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is the fallback to the
default nid when drconf_to_nid_single() returns -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) or
an invalid nid.
Skipping the extra lookup makes hot-add operations faster, especially
on machines with many LMBs.
Consider an LPAR with 126976 LMBs. In one test, hot-adding 126000
LMBs on an upatched kernel took ~3.5 hours while a patched kernel
completed the same operation in ~2 hours:
Unpatched (12450 seconds):
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[810169]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 9 07:34:01 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
Patched (7065 seconds):
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[877703]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 8 23:27:42 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
It should be noted that the speedup grows more substantial when
hot-adding LMBs at the end of the drconf range. This is because we
are skipping a linear LMB search.
To see the distinction, consider smaller hot-add test on the same
LPAR. A perf-stat run with 10 iterations showed that hot-adding 4096
LMBs completed less than 1 second faster on a patched kernel:
Unpatched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,753.42 msec task-clock # 0.992 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.55% )
4,708 context-switches # 0.045 K/sec ( +- 0.69% )
2,444 cpu-migrations # 0.023 K/sec ( +- 1.25% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.22% )
445,902,503,057 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.55% ) (66.67%)
8,558,376,740 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.92% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.88% ) (49.99%)
300,346,181,651 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.36% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.76% ) (50.01%)
258,091,488,691 instructions # 0.58 insn per cycle
# 1.16 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.22% ) (66.67%)
70,568,169,256 branches # 673.660 M/sec ( +- 0.17% ) (50.01%)
3,100,725,426 branch-misses # 4.39% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) (49.99%)
105.583 +- 0.589 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.56% )
Patched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,055.69 msec task-clock # 0.993 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.32% )
4,606 context-switches # 0.044 K/sec ( +- 0.20% )
2,463 cpu-migrations # 0.024 K/sec ( +- 0.93% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.25% )
442,951,129,921 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.32% ) (66.66%)
8,710,413,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.97% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.47% ) (50.06%)
299,656,905,836 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.65% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.39% ) (50.02%)
252,731,168,193 instructions # 0.57 insn per cycle
# 1.19 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.20% ) (66.66%)
68,902,851,121 branches # 662.173 M/sec ( +- 0.13% ) (49.94%)
3,100,242,882 branch-misses # 4.50% of all branches ( +- 0.15% ) (49.98%)
104.829 +- 0.325 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
This is consistent. An add-by-count hot-add operation adds LMBs
greedily, so LMBs near the start of the drconf range are considered
first. On an otherwise idle LPAR with so many LMBs we would expect to
find the LMBs we need near the start of the drconf range, hence the
smaller speedup.
Signed-off-by: Scott Cheloha <redacted>
---
Changelog:
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20200910175637.2865160-1-cheloha@linux.ibm.com/
v2:
- Move prototype for of_drconf_to_nid_single() to topology.h.
Requested by Michael Ellerman.
v3:
- Send the right patch. v2 is from the wrong branch, my mistake.
arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h | 3 +++
arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 2 +-
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c | 6 ++++--
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Hi Scott,
checkpatch.pl reports:
CHECK: extern prototypes should be avoided in .h files
#106: FILE: arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h:90:
+extern int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct drmem_lmb *);
WARNING: function definition argument 'struct drmem_lmb *' should also have an
identifier name
#106: FILE: arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h:90:
+extern int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct drmem_lmb *);
cheers,
Laurent.
quoted hunk
+
#if defined(CONFIG_NUMA) && defined(CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR)
extern int find_and_online_cpu_nid(int cpu);
#else
@@ -611,8 +611,10 @@ static int dlpar_add_lmb(struct drmem_lmb *lmb)block_sz=memory_block_size_bytes();-/* Find the node id for this address. */-nid=memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(lmb->base_addr);+/* Find the node id for this LMB. Fake one if necessary. */+nid=of_drconf_to_nid_single(lmb);+if(nid<0||!node_possible(nid))+nid=first_online_node;/* Add the memory */rc=__add_memory(nid,lmb->base_addr,block_sz);
From: Scott Cheloha <hidden> Date: 2020-09-16 14:43:35
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:39:53AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 15.09.20 21:46, Scott Cheloha wrote:
quoted
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
In short, we have a pointer to an LMB and then we are searching for
that LMB *again* in order to find its nid.
If we call of_drconf_to_nid_single() directly from dlpar_add_lmb() we
can skip the redundant lookup. The only error handling we need to
duplicate from memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is the fallback to the
default nid when drconf_to_nid_single() returns -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) or
an invalid nid.
Skipping the extra lookup makes hot-add operations faster, especially
on machines with many LMBs.
Consider an LPAR with 126976 LMBs. In one test, hot-adding 126000
LMBs on an upatched kernel took ~3.5 hours while a patched kernel
completed the same operation in ~2 hours:
Unpatched (12450 seconds):
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[810169]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 9 07:34:01 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
Patched (7065 seconds):
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[877703]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 8 23:27:42 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
It should be noted that the speedup grows more substantial when
hot-adding LMBs at the end of the drconf range. This is because we
are skipping a linear LMB search.
To see the distinction, consider smaller hot-add test on the same
LPAR. A perf-stat run with 10 iterations showed that hot-adding 4096
LMBs completed less than 1 second faster on a patched kernel:
Unpatched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,753.42 msec task-clock # 0.992 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.55% )
4,708 context-switches # 0.045 K/sec ( +- 0.69% )
2,444 cpu-migrations # 0.023 K/sec ( +- 1.25% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.22% )
445,902,503,057 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.55% ) (66.67%)
8,558,376,740 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.92% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.88% ) (49.99%)
300,346,181,651 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.36% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.76% ) (50.01%)
258,091,488,691 instructions # 0.58 insn per cycle
# 1.16 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.22% ) (66.67%)
70,568,169,256 branches # 673.660 M/sec ( +- 0.17% ) (50.01%)
3,100,725,426 branch-misses # 4.39% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) (49.99%)
105.583 +- 0.589 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.56% )
Patched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,055.69 msec task-clock # 0.993 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.32% )
4,606 context-switches # 0.044 K/sec ( +- 0.20% )
2,463 cpu-migrations # 0.024 K/sec ( +- 0.93% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.25% )
442,951,129,921 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.32% ) (66.66%)
8,710,413,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.97% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.47% ) (50.06%)
299,656,905,836 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.65% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.39% ) (50.02%)
252,731,168,193 instructions # 0.57 insn per cycle
# 1.19 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.20% ) (66.66%)
68,902,851,121 branches # 662.173 M/sec ( +- 0.13% ) (49.94%)
3,100,242,882 branch-misses # 4.50% of all branches ( +- 0.15% ) (49.98%)
104.829 +- 0.325 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
This is consistent. An add-by-count hot-add operation adds LMBs
greedily, so LMBs near the start of the drconf range are considered
first. On an otherwise idle LPAR with so many LMBs we would expect to
find the LMBs we need near the start of the drconf range, hence the
smaller speedup.
Signed-off-by: Scott Cheloha <redacted>
Hi Scott,
IIRC, ppc DLPAR does a single add_memory() [...]
Yes.
[...] for each LMB (16 MB).
The block size is set by the hypervisor. The default is 256MB. In
this test I had a block size of 256MB.
On multi-terabyte machines I would effectively always expect a block
size of 256MB. 16MB blocks are supported, but it is not the default
setting so it is increasingly rare.
With tons of LMBs, this will also make /proc/iomem explode in size (using a
list-based tree), making traversal significantly slower e.g., on
insertions and system ram walks.
I was wondering if you would get another performance boost under ppc
when using MEMHP_MERGE_RESOURCE [1]. AFAIKs, the resource boundaries are
not of interest. No guarantees, might be worth a try.
I'll give it a shot.
Did you investigate what else makes memory hotplug that slow? (126000
LMBs correspond to roughly 2TB, that shouldn't take 2 hours ...)
It was about ~31TB in 256MB blocks. It's a worst-case test (add all
the memory), but I'm pretty happy with a 1.5 hour improvement :)
Memory block devices might still be a slowdown (although we have an
xarray in place now that takes care of most pain).
Memory block devices are no longer a hotspot.
Some of the slowdown is in the printk overhead. We print a log for
every LMB. It is very silly. I intend to move those to a debug
priority, which should trivially speed things up.
Otherwise I need to do more profiling.
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden> Date: 2020-09-16 14:50:41
On 16.09.20 16:39, Scott Cheloha wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:39:53AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
quoted
On 15.09.20 21:46, Scott Cheloha wrote:
quoted
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
In short, we have a pointer to an LMB and then we are searching for
that LMB *again* in order to find its nid.
If we call of_drconf_to_nid_single() directly from dlpar_add_lmb() we
can skip the redundant lookup. The only error handling we need to
duplicate from memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() is the fallback to the
default nid when drconf_to_nid_single() returns -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) or
an invalid nid.
Skipping the extra lookup makes hot-add operations faster, especially
on machines with many LMBs.
Consider an LPAR with 126976 LMBs. In one test, hot-adding 126000
LMBs on an upatched kernel took ~3.5 hours while a patched kernel
completed the same operation in ~2 hours:
Unpatched (12450 seconds):
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[810169]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 9 04:06:31 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 9 07:34:01 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
Patched (7065 seconds):
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 drmgr[877703]: drmgr: -c mem -a -q 126000
Sep 8 21:49:57 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Attempting to hot-add 126000 LMB(s)
[...]
Sep 8 23:27:42 ltc-brazos1 kernel: pseries-hotplug-mem: Memory at 20000000 (drc index 80000002) was hot-added
It should be noted that the speedup grows more substantial when
hot-adding LMBs at the end of the drconf range. This is because we
are skipping a linear LMB search.
To see the distinction, consider smaller hot-add test on the same
LPAR. A perf-stat run with 10 iterations showed that hot-adding 4096
LMBs completed less than 1 second faster on a patched kernel:
Unpatched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,753.42 msec task-clock # 0.992 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.55% )
4,708 context-switches # 0.045 K/sec ( +- 0.69% )
2,444 cpu-migrations # 0.023 K/sec ( +- 1.25% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.22% )
445,902,503,057 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.55% ) (66.67%)
8,558,376,740 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.92% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.88% ) (49.99%)
300,346,181,651 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.36% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.76% ) (50.01%)
258,091,488,691 instructions # 0.58 insn per cycle
# 1.16 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.22% ) (66.67%)
70,568,169,256 branches # 673.660 M/sec ( +- 0.17% ) (50.01%)
3,100,725,426 branch-misses # 4.39% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) (49.99%)
105.583 +- 0.589 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.56% )
Patched:
Performance counter stats for 'drmgr -c mem -a -q 4096' (10 runs):
104,055.69 msec task-clock # 0.993 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.32% )
4,606 context-switches # 0.044 K/sec ( +- 0.20% )
2,463 cpu-migrations # 0.024 K/sec ( +- 0.93% )
394 page-faults # 0.004 K/sec ( +- 0.25% )
442,951,129,921 cycles # 4.257 GHz ( +- 0.32% ) (66.66%)
8,710,413,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 1.97% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.47% ) (50.06%)
299,656,905,836 stalled-cycles-backend # 67.65% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.39% ) (50.02%)
252,731,168,193 instructions # 0.57 insn per cycle
# 1.19 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.20% ) (66.66%)
68,902,851,121 branches # 662.173 M/sec ( +- 0.13% ) (49.94%)
3,100,242,882 branch-misses # 4.50% of all branches ( +- 0.15% ) (49.98%)
104.829 +- 0.325 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
This is consistent. An add-by-count hot-add operation adds LMBs
greedily, so LMBs near the start of the drconf range are considered
first. On an otherwise idle LPAR with so many LMBs we would expect to
find the LMBs we need near the start of the drconf range, hence the
smaller speedup.
Signed-off-by: Scott Cheloha <redacted>
Hi Scott,
IIRC, ppc DLPAR does a single add_memory() [...]
Yes.
quoted
[...] for each LMB (16 MB).
The block size is set by the hypervisor. The default is 256MB. In
this test I had a block size of 256MB.
Oh, I wasn't aware that it's configurable, thanks for pointing that out
(missed the custom memory_block_size_bytes() implementation).
I wonder how it works with pseries_remove_memblock(), that uses
MIN_MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE with __remove_memory() - that will always BUG_ON
in try_remove_memory() with BUG_ON(check_hotplug_memory_range(start,
size)) in case the size is < memory_block_size_bytes().
Maybe that's not called on such machines ...
On multi-terabyte machines I would effectively always expect a block
size of 256MB. 16MB blocks are supported, but it is not the default
setting so it is increasingly rare.>
quoted
With tons of LMBs, this will also make /proc/iomem explode in size (using a
list-based tree), making traversal significantly slower e.g., on
insertions and system ram walks.
I was wondering if you would get another performance boost under ppc
when using MEMHP_MERGE_RESOURCE [1]. AFAIKs, the resource boundaries are
not of interest. No guarantees, might be worth a try.
I'll give it a shot.
quoted
Did you investigate what else makes memory hotplug that slow? (126000
LMBs correspond to roughly 2TB, that shouldn't take 2 hours ...)
It was about ~31TB in 256MB blocks. It's a worst-case test (add all
the memory), but I'm pretty happy with a 1.5 hour improvement :)
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2020-10-07 03:28:00
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 14:46:47 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
During memory hot-add, dlpar_add_lmb() calls memory_add_physaddr_to_nid()
to determine which node id (nid) to use when later calling __add_memory().
This is wasteful. On pseries, memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() finds an
appropriate nid for a given address by looking up the LMB containing the
address and then passing that LMB to of_drconf_to_nid_single() to get the
nid. In dlpar_add_lmb() we get this address from the LMB itself.
[...]