@@ -2047,8 +2047,36 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
if (!nmask || node_isset(hpage_node, *nmask)) {
mpol_cond_put(pol);
- page = __alloc_pages_node(hpage_node,
- gfp | __GFP_THISNODE, order);
+ /*
+ * We cannot invoke reclaim if __GFP_THISNODE
+ * is set. Invoking reclaim with
+ * __GFP_THISNODE set, would cause THP
+ * allocations to trigger heavy swapping
+ * despite there may be tons of free memory
+ * (including potentially plenty of THP
+ * already available in the buddy) on all the
+ * other NUMA nodes.
+ *
+ * At most we could invoke compaction when
+ * __GFP_THISNODE is set (but we would need to
+ * refrain from invoking reclaim even if
+ * compaction returned COMPACT_SKIPPED because
+ * there wasn't not enough memory to succeed
+ * compaction). For now just avoid
+ * __GFP_THISNODE instead of limiting the
+ * allocation path to a strict and single
+ * compaction invocation.
+ *
+ * Supposedly if direct reclaim was enabled by
+ * the caller, the app prefers THP regardless
+ * of the node it comes from so this would be
+ * more desiderable behavior than only
+ * providing THP originated from the local
+ * node in such case.
+ */
+ if (!(gfp & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM))
+ gfp |= __GFP_THISNODE;
+ page = __alloc_pages_node(hpage_node, gfp, order);
goto out;
}
}
qemu uses MADV_HUGEPAGE which allows direct compaction (i.e. __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set). The problem is that direct compaction combined with the NUMA __GFP_THISNODE logic in mempolicy.c is telling reclaim to swap very hard the local node, instead of failing the allocation if there's no THP available in the local node. Such logic was ok until __GFP_THISNODE was added to the THP allocation path even with MPOL_DEFAULT. The idea behind the __GFP_THISNODE addition, is that it is better to provide local memory in PAGE_SIZE units than to use remote NUMA THP backed memory. That largely depends on the remote latency though, on threadrippers for example the overhead is relatively low in my experience. The combination of __GFP_THISNODE and __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM results in extremely slow qemu startup with vfio, if the VM is larger than the size of one host NUMA node. This is because it will try very hard to unsuccessfully swapout get_user_pages pinned pages as result of the __GFP_THISNODE being set, instead of falling back to PAGE_SIZE allocations and instead of trying to allocate THP on other nodes (it would be even worse without vfio type1 GUP pins of course, except it'd be swapping heavily instead). It's very easy to reproduce this by setting transparent_hugepage/defrag to "always", even with a simple memhog. 1) This can be fixed by retaining the __GFP_THISNODE logic also for __GFP_DIRECT_RELCAIM by allowing only one compaction run. Not even COMPACT_SKIPPED (i.e. compaction failing because not enough free memory in the zone) should be allowed to invoke reclaim. 2) An alternative is not use __GFP_THISNODE if __GFP_DIRECT_RELCAIM has been set by the caller (i.e. MADV_HUGEPAGE or defrag="always"). That would keep the NUMA locality restriction only when __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is not set by the caller. So THP will be provided from remote nodes if available before falling back to PAGE_SIZE units in the local node, but an app using defrag = always (or madvise with MADV_HUGEPAGE) supposedly prefers that. These are the results of 1) (higher GB/s is better). Finished: 30 GB mapped, 10.188535s elapsed, 2.94GB/s Finished: 34 GB mapped, 12.274777s elapsed, 2.77GB/s Finished: 38 GB mapped, 13.847840s elapsed, 2.74GB/s Finished: 42 GB mapped, 14.288587s elapsed, 2.94GB/s Finished: 30 GB mapped, 8.907367s elapsed, 3.37GB/s Finished: 34 GB mapped, 10.724797s elapsed, 3.17GB/s Finished: 38 GB mapped, 14.272882s elapsed, 2.66GB/s Finished: 42 GB mapped, 13.929525s elapsed, 3.02GB/s These are the results of 2) (higher GB/s is better). Finished: 30 GB mapped, 10.163159s elapsed, 2.95GB/s Finished: 34 GB mapped, 11.806526s elapsed, 2.88GB/s Finished: 38 GB mapped, 10.369081s elapsed, 3.66GB/s Finished: 42 GB mapped, 12.357719s elapsed, 3.40GB/s Finished: 30 GB mapped, 8.251396s elapsed, 3.64GB/s Finished: 34 GB mapped, 12.093030s elapsed, 2.81GB/s Finished: 38 GB mapped, 11.824903s elapsed, 3.21GB/s Finished: 42 GB mapped, 15.950661s elapsed, 2.63GB/s This is current upstream (higher GB/s is better). Finished: 30 GB mapped, 8.821632s elapsed, 3.40GB/s Finished: 34 GB mapped, 341.979543s elapsed, 0.10GB/s Finished: 38 GB mapped, 761.933231s elapsed, 0.05GB/s Finished: 42 GB mapped, 1188.409235s elapsed, 0.04GB/s vfio is a good test because by pinning all memory it avoids the swapping and reclaim only wastes CPU, a memhog based test would created swapout storms and supposedly show a bigger stddev. What is better between 1) and 2) depends on the hardware and on the software. Virtualization EPT/NTP gets a bigger boost from THP as well than host applications. This commit implements 2). Reported-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> --- mm/mempolicy.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)