From 252c5f94d944487e9f50ece7942b0fbf659c5c31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lee Schermerhorn Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:03:40 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] mmap: avoid unnecessary anon_vma lock acquisition in vma_adjust() We noticed very erratic behavior [throughput] with the AIM7 shared workload running on recent distro [SLES11] and mainline kernels on an 8-socket, 32-core, 256GB x86_64 platform. On the SLES11 kernel [2.6.27.19+] with Barcelona processors, as we increased the load [10s of thousands of tasks], the throughput would vary between two "plateaus"--one at ~65K jobs per minute and one at ~130K jpm. The simple patch below causes the results to smooth out at the ~130k plateau. But wait, there's more: We do not see this behavior on smaller platforms--e.g., 4 socket/8 core. This could be the result of the larger number of cpus on the larger platform--a scalability issue--or it could be the result of the larger number of interconnect "hops" between some nodes in this platform and how the tasks for a given load end up distributed over the nodes' cpus and memories--a stochastic NUMA effect. The variability in the results are less pronounced [on the same platform] with Shanghai processors and with mainline kernels. With 31-rc6 on Shanghai processors and 288 file systems on 288 fibre attached storage volumes, the curves [jpm vs load] are both quite flat with the patched kernel consistently producing ~3.9% better throughput [~80K jpm vs ~77K jpm] than the unpatched kernel. Profiling indicated that the "slow" runs were incurring high[er] contention on an anon_vma lock in vma_adjust(), apparently called from the sbrk() system call. The patch: A comment in mm/mmap.c:vma_adjust() suggests that we don't really need the anon_vma lock when we're only adjusting the end of a vma, as is the case for brk(). The comment questions whether it's worth while to optimize for this case. Apparently, on the newer, larger x86_64 platforms, with interesting NUMA topologies, it is worth while--especially considering that the patch [if correct!] is quite simple. We can detect this condition--no overlap with next vma--by noting a NULL "importer". The anon_vma pointer will also be NULL in this case, so simply avoid loading vma->anon_vma to avoid the lock. However, we DO need to take the anon_vma lock when we're inserting a vma ['insert' non-NULL] even when we have no overlap [NULL "importer"], so we need to check for 'insert', as well. And Hugh points out that we should also take it when adjusting vm_start (so that rmap.c can rely upon vma_address() while it holds the anon_vma lock). akpm: Zhang Yanmin reprts a 150% throughput improvement with aim7, so it might be -stable material even though thiss isn't a regression: "this issue is not clear on dual socket Nehalem machine (2*4*2 cpu), but is severe on large machine (4*8*2 cpu)" [hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk: test vma start too] Signed-off-by: Lee Schermerhorn Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins Cc: Nick Piggin Cc: Eric Whitney Tested-by: "Zhang, Yanmin" Cc: Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- mm/mmap.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c index 56eb871c32d0..b6d74b3dbbc2 100644 --- a/mm/mmap.c +++ b/mm/mmap.c @@ -570,9 +570,9 @@ again: remove_next = 1 + (end > next->vm_end); /* * When changing only vma->vm_end, we don't really need - * anon_vma lock: but is that case worth optimizing out? + * anon_vma lock. */ - if (vma->anon_vma) + if (vma->anon_vma && (insert || importer || start != vma->vm_start)) anon_vma = vma->anon_vma; if (anon_vma) { spin_lock(&anon_vma->lock); -- 2.20.1