On 5/17/22 11:57 PM, Feng Zhou wrote:
在 2022/5/18 下午2:32, Alexei Starovoitov 写道:
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:27 PM Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
From: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
We encountered bad case on big system with 96 CPUs that
alloc_htab_elem() would last for 1ms. The reason is that after the
prealloc hashtab has no free elems, when trying to update, it will still
grab spin_locks of all cpus. If there are multiple update users, the
competition is very serious.
So this patch add is_empty in pcpu_freelist_head to check freelist
having free or not. If having, grab spin_lock, or check next cpu's
freelist.
Before patch: hash_map performance
./map_perf_test 1
could you explain what parameter '1' means here?
0:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 975345 events per sec
4:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 855367 events per sec
12:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 860862 events per sec
8:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 849561 events per sec
3:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 849074 events per sec
6:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 847120 events per sec
10:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 845047 events per sec
5:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 841266 events per sec
14:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 849740 events per sec
2:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 839598 events per sec
9:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 838695 events per sec
11:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 845390 events per sec
7:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 834865 events per sec
13:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 842619 events per sec
1:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 804231 events per sec
15:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 795314 events per sec
hash_map the worst: no free
./map_perf_test 2048
6:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28628 events per sec
5:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28553 events per sec
11:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28543 events per sec
3:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28444 events per sec
1:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28418 events per sec
7:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28427 events per sec
13:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28330 events per sec
14:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28263 events per sec
9:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28211 events per sec
15:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28193 events per sec
12:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28190 events per sec
10:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28129 events per sec
8:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28116 events per sec
4:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 27906 events per sec
2:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 27801 events per sec
0:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 27416 events per sec
3:worse hash_map_perf pre-alloc 28188 events per sec
ftrace trace
0) | htab_map_update_elem() {
0) 0.198 us | migrate_disable();
0) | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave() {
0) 0.157 us | preempt_count_add();
0) 0.538 us | }
0) 0.260 us | lookup_elem_raw();
0) | alloc_htab_elem() {
0) | __pcpu_freelist_pop() {
0) | _raw_spin_lock() {
0) 0.152 us | preempt_count_add();
0) 0.352 us | native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath();
0) 1.065 us | }
| ...
0) | _raw_spin_unlock() {
0) 0.254 us | preempt_count_sub();
0) 0.555 us | }
0) + 25.188 us | }
0) + 25.486 us | }
0) | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore() {
0) 0.155 us | preempt_count_sub();
0) 0.454 us | }
0) 0.148 us | migrate_enable();
0) + 28.439 us | }
The test machine is 16C, trying to get spin_lock 17 times, in addition
to 16c, there is an extralist.
Is this with small max_entries and a large number of cpus?
If so, probably better to fix would be to artificially
bump max_entries to be 4x of num_cpus.
Racy is_empty check still wastes the loop.
This hash_map worst testcase with 16 CPUs, map's max_entries is 1000.
This is the test case I constructed, it is to fill the map on purpose,
and then
continue to update, just to reproduce the problem phenomenon.
The bad case we encountered with 96 CPUs, map's max_entries is 10240.
For such cases, most likely the map is *almost* full. What is the
performance if we increase map size, e.g., from 10240 to 16K(16192)?
