Re: page fault scalability patch V11 [0/7]: overview

From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: 2004-11-20 14:14:33
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> 
>>>Furthermore, see Robin Holt's results regarding the performance of the
>>>atomic operations and their relation to cacheline sharing.
> 
> 
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 01:40:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
>>Well yeah, but a. their patch isn't in 2.6 (or 2.4), and b. anon_rss
> 
> 
> Irrelevant. Unshare cachelines with hot mm-global ones, and the
> "problem" goes away.
> 

That's the idea.

> This stuff is going on and on about some purist "no atomic operations
> anywhere" weirdness even though killing the last atomic operation
> creates problems and doesn't improve performance.
> 

Huh? How is not wanting to impact single threaded performance being
"purist weirdness"? Practical, I'd call it.

> 
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 01:40:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
>>means another atomic op. While this doesn't immediately make it a
>>showstopper, it is gradually slowing down the single threaded page
>>fault path too, which is bad.
> 
> 
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> 
>>>And frankly, the argument that the space overhead of per-cpu counters
>>>is problematic is not compelling. Even at 1024 cpus it's smaller than
>>>an ia64 pagetable page, of which there are numerous instances attached
>>>to each mm.
> 
> 
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 01:40:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
>>1024 CPUs * 64 byte cachelines == 64K, no? Well I'm sure they probably
>>don't even care about 64K on their large machines, but...
>>On i386 this would be maybe 32 * 128 byte == 4K per task for distro
>>kernels. Not so good.
> 
> 
> Why the Hell would you bother giving each cpu a separate cacheline?
> The odds of bouncing significantly merely amongst the counters are not
> particularly high.
> 

Hmm yeah I guess wouldn't put them all on different cachelines.
As you can see though, Christoph ran into a wall at 8 CPUs, so
having them densly packed still might not be enough.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Fri Nov 19 22:26:24 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:32 EST