On 5 Nov 2018, at 21:20, Daniel Jordan wrote: > Hi Zi, > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 01:49:14PM -0500, Zi Yan wrote: >> On 5 Nov 2018, at 11:55, Daniel Jordan wrote: >> >> Do you think if it makes sense to use ktask for huge page migration (the data >> copy part)? > > It certainly could. > >> I did some experiments back in 2016[1], which showed that migrating one 2MB >> page >> with 8 threads could achieve 2.8x throughput of the existing single-threaded >> method. >> The problem with my parallel page migration patchset at that time was that it >> has no CPU-utilization awareness, which is solved by your patches now. > > Did you run with fewer than 8 threads? I'd want a bigger speedup than 2.8x > for > 8, and a smaller thread count might improve thread utilization.
Yes. When migrating one 2MB THP with migrate_pages() system call on a
two-socket server
with 2 E5-2650 v3 CPUs (10 cores per socket) across two sockets, here are the
page migration
throughput numbers:
throughput factor
1 thread 2.15 GB/s 1x
2 threads 3.05 GB/s 1.42x
4 threads 4.50 GB/s 2.09x
8 threads 5.98 GB/s 2.78x
>
> It would be nice to multithread at a higher granularity than 2M, too: a range
> of THPs might also perform better than a single page.
Sure. But the kernel currently does not copy multiple pages altogether even if
a range
of THPs is migrated. Page copy function is interleaved with page table
operations
for every single page.
I also did some study and modified the kernel to improve this, which I called
concurrent page migration in https://lwn.net/Articles/714991/. It further
improves page migration throughput.
—
Best Regards,
Yan Zi
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
