Sign Up
Log In
Log In
or
Sign Up
Places
All Projects
Status Monitor
Collapse sidebar
No build reason found for pool-leap-15.5:s390x
SUSE:SLE-12:Update
glibc.i686.11078
threaded-trim-threshold.patch
Overview
Repositories
Revisions
Requests
Users
Attributes
Meta
File threaded-trim-threshold.patch of Package glibc.i686.11078
From c26efef9798914e208329c0e8c3c73bb1135d9e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 12:14:14 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] malloc: Consistently apply trim_threshold to all heaps [BZ #17195] Trimming heaps is a balance between saving memory and the system overhead required to update page tables and discard allocated pages. The malloc option M_TRIM_THRESHOLD is a tunable that users are meant to use to decide where this balance point is but it is only applied to the main arena. For scalability reasons, glibc malloc has per-thread heaps but these are shrunk with madvise() if there is one page free at the top of the heap. In some circumstances this can lead to high system overhead if a thread has a control flow like while (data_to_process) { buf = malloc(large_size); do_stuff(); free(buf); } For a large size, the free() will call madvise (pagetable teardown, page free and TLB flush) every time followed immediately by a malloc (fault, kernel page alloc, zeroing and charge accounting). The kernel overhead can dominate such a workload. This patch allows the user to tune when madvise gets called by applying the trim threshold to the per-thread heaps and using similar logic to the main arena when deciding whether to shrink. Alternatively if the dynamic brk/mmap threshold gets adjusted then the new values will be obeyed by the per-thread heaps. Bug 17195 was a test case motivated by a problem encountered in scientific applications written in python that performance badly due to high page fault overhead. The basic operation of such a program was posted by Julian Taylor https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-02/msg00373.html With this patch applied, the overhead is eliminated. All numbers in this report are in seconds and were recorded by running Julian's program 30 times. pyarray glibc madvise 2.21 v2 System min 1.81 ( 0.00%) 0.00 (100.00%) System mean 1.93 ( 0.00%) 0.02 ( 99.20%) System stddev 0.06 ( 0.00%) 0.01 ( 88.99%) System max 2.06 ( 0.00%) 0.03 ( 98.54%) Elapsed min 3.26 ( 0.00%) 2.37 ( 27.30%) Elapsed mean 3.39 ( 0.00%) 2.41 ( 28.84%) Elapsed stddev 0.14 ( 0.00%) 0.02 ( 82.73%) Elapsed max 4.05 ( 0.00%) 2.47 ( 39.01%) glibc madvise 2.21 v2 User 141.86 142.28 System 57.94 0.60 Elapsed 102.02 72.66 Note that almost a minutes worth of system time is eliminted and the program completes 28% faster on average. To illustrate the problem without python this is a basic test-case for the worst case scenario where every free is a madvise followed by a an alloc /* gcc bench-free.c -lpthread -o bench-free */ static int num = 1024; void __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) dostuff (void *p) { } void *worker (void *data) { int i; for (i = num; i--;) { void *m = malloc (48*4096); dostuff (m); free (m); } return NULL; } int main() { int i; pthread_t t; void *ret; if (pthread_create (&t, NULL, worker, NULL)) exit (2); if (pthread_join (t, &ret)) exit (3); return 0; } Before the patch, this resulted in 1024 calls to madvise. With the patch applied, madvise is called twice because the default trim threshold is high enough to avoid this. This a more complex case where there is a mix of frees. It's simply a different worker function for the test case above void *worker (void *data) { int i; int j = 0; void *free_index[num]; for (i = num; i--;) { void *m = malloc ((i % 58) *4096); dostuff (m); if (i % 2 == 0) { free (m); } else { free_index[j++] = m; } } for (; j >= 0; j--) { free(free_index[j]); } return NULL; } glibc 2.21 calls malloc 90305 times but with the patch applied, it's called 13438. Increasing the trim threshold will decrease the number of times it's called with the option of eliminating the overhead. ebizzy is meant to generate a workload resembling common web application server workloads. It is threaded with a large working set that at its core has an allocation, do_stuff, free loop that also hits this case. The primary metric of the benchmark is records processed per second. This is running on my desktop which is a single socket machine with an I7-4770 and 8 cores. Each thread count was run for 30 seconds. It was only run once as the performance difference is so high that the variation is insignificant. glibc 2.21 patch threads 1 10230 44114 threads 2 19153 84925 threads 4 34295 134569 threads 8 51007 183387 Note that the saving happens to be a concidence as the size allocated by ebizzy was less than the default threshold. If a different number of chunks were specified then it may also be necessary to tune the threshold to compensate This is roughly quadrupling the performance of this benchmark. The difference in system CPU usage illustrates why. ebizzy running 1 thread with glibc 2.21 10230 records/s 306904 real 30.00 s user 7.47 s sys 22.49 s 22.49 seconds was spent in the kernel for a workload runinng 30 seconds. With the patch applied ebizzy running 1 thread with patch applied 44126 records/s 1323792 real 30.00 s user 29.97 s sys 0.00 s system CPU usage was zero with the patch applied. strace shows that glibc running this workload calls madvise approximately 9000 times a second. With the patch applied madvise was called twice during the workload (or 0.06 times per second). 2015-02-10 Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> [BZ #17195] * malloc/arena.c (free): Apply trim threshold to per-thread heaps as well as the main arena. --- Index: glibc-2.19/malloc/arena.c =================================================================== --- glibc-2.19.orig/malloc/arena.c +++ glibc-2.19/malloc/arena.c @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ heap_trim (heap_info *heap, size_t pad) unsigned long pagesz = GLRO (dl_pagesize); mchunkptr top_chunk = top (ar_ptr), p, bck, fwd; heap_info *prev_heap; - long new_size, top_size, extra, prev_size, misalign; + long new_size, top_size, top_area, extra, prev_size, misalign; /* Can this heap go away completely? */ while (top_chunk == chunk_at_offset (heap, sizeof (*heap))) @@ -710,9 +710,16 @@ heap_trim (heap_info *heap, size_t pad) set_head (top_chunk, new_size | PREV_INUSE); /*check_chunk(ar_ptr, top_chunk);*/ } + + /* Uses similar logic for per-thread arenas as the main arena with systrim + by preserving the top pad and at least a page. */ top_size = chunksize (top_chunk); - extra = (top_size - pad - MINSIZE - 1) & ~(pagesz - 1); - if (extra < (long) pagesz) + top_area = top_size - MINSIZE - 1; + if (top_area <= pad) + return 0; + + extra = ALIGN_DOWN(top_area - pad, pagesz); + if ((unsigned long) extra < mp_.trim_threshold) return 0; /* Try to shrink. */ Index: glibc-2.19/malloc/malloc.c =================================================================== --- glibc-2.19.orig/malloc/malloc.c +++ glibc-2.19/malloc/malloc.c @@ -241,6 +241,8 @@ /* For MIN, MAX, powerof2. */ #include <sys/param.h> +/* For ALIGN_DOWN. */ +#include <libc-internal.h> /* Debugging:
Locations
Projects
Search
Status Monitor
Help
OpenBuildService.org
Documentation
API Documentation
Code of Conduct
Contact
Support
@OBShq
Terms
openSUSE Build Service is sponsored by
The Open Build Service is an
openSUSE project
.
Sign Up
Log In
Places
Places
All Projects
Status Monitor