Hi Matthew,
Thank you for your comment. If you look at the data, having memset()
actually benefits initializing data.
With base it takes:
[ 66.148867] node 0 initialised, 128312523 pages in 7200ms
With fix:
[ 15.260634] node 0 initialised, 128312523 pages in 4190ms
So 4.19s vs 7.2s for the same number of "struct page". This is because
memset() actually brings "struct page" into cache with efficient block
initializing store instruction. I have not tested if there is the same
effect on Intel.
Pasha
On 03/23/2017 07:26 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:01:48PM -0400, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
When deferred struct page initialization feature is enabled, we get a
performance gain of initializing vmemmap in parallel after other CPUs are
started. However, we still zero the memory for vmemmap using one boot CPU.
This patch-set fixes the memset-zeroing limitation by deferring it as well.
Here is example performance gain on SPARC with 32T:
base
https://hastebin.com/ozanelatat.go
fix
https://hastebin.com/utonawukof.go
As you can see without the fix it takes: 97.89s to boot
With the fix it takes: 46.91 to boot.
How long does it take if we just don't zero this memory at all? We seem
to be initialising most of struct page in __init_single_page(), so it
seems like a lot of additional complexity to conditionally zero the rest
of struct page.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
