diff mbox series

[net-next,v5,01/13] mm: page_frag: add a test module for page_frag

Message ID 20240528125604.63048-2-linyunsheng@huawei.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: Netdev Maintainers
Headers show
Series First try to replace page_frag with page_frag_cache | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/series_format success Posting correctly formatted
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for net-next, async
netdev/ynl success Generated files up to date; no warnings/errors; no diff in generated;
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 908 this patch: 908
netdev/build_tools success No tools touched, skip
netdev/cc_maintainers success CCed 2 of 2 maintainers
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 906 this patch: 906
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api fail Found: 'module_param' was: 0 now: 4
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 913 this patch: 913
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
netdev/build_clang_rust success No Rust files in patch. Skipping build
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0

Commit Message

Yunsheng Lin May 28, 2024, 12:55 p.m. UTC
Basing on the lib/objpool.c, change it to something like a
ptrpool, so that we can utilize that to test the correctness
and performance of the page_frag.

The testing is done by ensuring that the fragments allocated
from a frag_frag_cache instance is pushed into a ptrpool
instance in a kthread binded to a specified cpu, and a kthread
binded to a specified cpu will pop the fragmemt from the
ptrpool and free the fragmemt.

We may refactor out the common part between objpool and ptrpool
if this ptrpool thing turns out to be helpful for other place.

CC: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
---
 mm/Kconfig.debug    |   8 +
 mm/Makefile         |   1 +
 mm/page_frag_test.c | 384 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 393 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 mm/page_frag_test.c

Comments

Jakub Kicinski May 30, 2024, 12:29 a.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, 28 May 2024 20:55:51 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> Basing on the lib/objpool.c, change it to something like a
> ptrpool, so that we can utilize that to test the correctness
> and performance of the page_frag.
> 
> The testing is done by ensuring that the fragments allocated
> from a frag_frag_cache instance is pushed into a ptrpool
> instance in a kthread binded to a specified cpu, and a kthread
> binded to a specified cpu will pop the fragmemt from the

fragment

> ptrpool and free the fragmemt.
> 
> We may refactor out the common part between objpool and ptrpool
> if this ptrpool thing turns out to be helpful for other place.

Is this test actually meaningfully testing page_frag or rather
the objpool construct and the scheduler? :S
Yunsheng Lin May 30, 2024, 9:17 a.m. UTC | #2
On 2024/5/30 8:29, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 20:55:51 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> Basing on the lib/objpool.c, change it to something like a
>> ptrpool, so that we can utilize that to test the correctness
>> and performance of the page_frag.
>>
>> The testing is done by ensuring that the fragments allocated
>> from a frag_frag_cache instance is pushed into a ptrpool
>> instance in a kthread binded to a specified cpu, and a kthread
>> binded to a specified cpu will pop the fragmemt from the
> 
> fragment
> 
>> ptrpool and free the fragmemt.
>>
>> We may refactor out the common part between objpool and ptrpool
>> if this ptrpool thing turns out to be helpful for other place.
> 
> Is this test actually meaningfully testing page_frag or rather
> the objpool construct and the scheduler? :S

For the objpool part, I guess it is ok to say that it is a
meaningfully testing for both page_frag and objpool if there is
changing to either of them.

For the scheduler part, this test provides the below module param
to avoid the the noise from scheduler.

+static int test_push_cpu;
+module_param(test_push_cpu, int, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_push_cpu, "test cpu for pushing fragment");
+
+static int test_pop_cpu;
+module_param(test_pop_cpu, int, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_pop_cpu, "test cpu for popping fragment");

Or is there any better idea for testing page_frag?

Thanks for taking a look.

> 
> .
>
Jakub Kicinski May 30, 2024, 3:16 p.m. UTC | #3
On Thu, 30 May 2024 17:17:17 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> > Is this test actually meaningfully testing page_frag or rather
> > the objpool construct and the scheduler? :S  
> 
> For the objpool part, I guess it is ok to say that it is a
> meaningfully testing for both page_frag and objpool if there is
> changing to either of them.

Why guess when you can measure it. 
Slow one down and see if it impacts the benchmark.

> For the scheduler part, this test provides the below module param
> to avoid the the noise from scheduler.
> 
> +static int test_push_cpu;
> +module_param(test_push_cpu, int, 0600);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_push_cpu, "test cpu for pushing fragment");
> +
> +static int test_pop_cpu;
> +module_param(test_pop_cpu, int, 0600);
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_pop_cpu, "test cpu for popping fragment");
> 
> Or is there any better idea for testing page_frag?
Yunsheng Lin May 31, 2024, 8:50 a.m. UTC | #4
On 2024/5/30 23:16, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2024 17:17:17 +0800 Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>>> Is this test actually meaningfully testing page_frag or rather
>>> the objpool construct and the scheduler? :S  
>>
>> For the objpool part, I guess it is ok to say that it is a
>> meaningfully testing for both page_frag and objpool if there is
>> changing to either of them.
> 
> Why guess when you can measure it. 
> Slow one down and see if it impacts the benchmark.

Before the slowing down on arm64 system:

 Performance counter stats for 'insmod ./page_frag_test.ko test_push_cpu=16 test_pop_cpu=17' (500 runs):

         19.420606      task-clock (msec)         #    0.001 CPUs utilized            ( +-  0.82% )
                 7      context-switches          #    0.377 K/sec                    ( +-  0.30% )
                 1      cpu-migrations            #    0.038 K/sec                    ( +-  2.82% )
                84      page-faults               #    0.004 M/sec                    ( +-  0.06% )
          50423999      cycles                    #    2.596 GHz                      ( +-  0.82% )
          35558295      instructions              #    0.71  insn per cycle           ( +-  0.09% )
           8340405      branches                  #  429.462 M/sec                    ( +-  0.08% )
             20669      branch-misses             #    0.25% of all branches          ( +-  0.10% )

      24.047641626 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.08% )


And there are 5120000 push and pop operations for each iteration,
so roughly each push and pop operation costs about 4687ns.

By adding 50ns delay in *__page_frag_alloc_va_align()
@@ -300,6 +297,8 @@ void *__page_frag_alloc_va_align(struct page_frag_cache *nc,
 {
        unsigned int remaining = nc->remaining & align_mask;

+       ndelay(50);
+
        if (unlikely(fragsz > remaining)) {


We have:
 Performance counter stats for 'insmod ./page_frag_test.ko test_push_cpu=16 test_pop_cpu=17' (500 runs):

         18.012657      task-clock (msec)         #    0.001 CPUs utilized            ( +-  0.01% )
                 7      context-switches          #    0.395 K/sec                    ( +-  0.20% )
                 1      cpu-migrations            #    0.052 K/sec                    ( +-  1.35% )
                84      page-faults               #    0.005 M/sec                    ( +-  0.06% )
          46765406      cycles                    #    2.596 GHz                      ( +-  0.01% )
          35253336      instructions              #    0.75  insn per cycle           ( +-  0.00% )
           8277063      branches                  #  459.514 M/sec                    ( +-  0.00% )
             20558      branch-misses             #    0.25% of all branches          ( +-  0.07% )

      24.313647557 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.07% )


(24.313647557 - 24.047641626) * 1000000000 / 5120000 = 51ns, so the
testing seems correct.

> 
>> For the scheduler part, this test provides the below module param
>> to avoid the the noise from scheduler.
>>
>> +static int test_push_cpu;
>> +module_param(test_push_cpu, int, 0600);
>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_push_cpu, "test cpu for pushing fragment");
>> +
>> +static int test_pop_cpu;
>> +module_param(test_pop_cpu, int, 0600);
>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_pop_cpu, "test cpu for popping fragment");
>>
>> Or is there any better idea for testing page_frag?
> 
> .
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/mm/Kconfig.debug b/mm/Kconfig.debug
index afc72fde0f03..1ebcd45f47d4 100644
--- a/mm/Kconfig.debug
+++ b/mm/Kconfig.debug
@@ -142,6 +142,14 @@  config DEBUG_PAGE_REF
 	  kernel code.  However the runtime performance overhead is virtually
 	  nil until the tracepoints are actually enabled.
 
+config DEBUG_PAGE_FRAG_TEST
+	tristate "Test module for page_frag"
+	default n
+	depends on m && DEBUG_KERNEL
+	help
+	  This builds the "page_frag_test" module that is used to test the
+	  correctness and performance of page_frag's implementation.
+
 config DEBUG_RODATA_TEST
     bool "Testcase for the marking rodata read-only"
     depends on STRICT_KERNEL_RWX
diff --git a/mm/Makefile b/mm/Makefile
index 85f29ef7bedd..d2bb17d06b88 100644
--- a/mm/Makefile
+++ b/mm/Makefile
@@ -102,6 +102,7 @@  obj-$(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) += memory-failure.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_HWPOISON_INJECT) += hwpoison-inject.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK) += kmemleak.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA_TEST) += rodata_test.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGE_FRAG_TEST) += page_frag_test.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGTABLE) += debug_vm_pgtable.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_PAGE_OWNER) += page_owner.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_MEMORY_ISOLATION) += page_isolation.o
diff --git a/mm/page_frag_test.c b/mm/page_frag_test.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..21ccb4359cbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/mm/page_frag_test.c
@@ -0,0 +1,384 @@ 
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+/*
+ * Test module for page_frag cache
+ *
+ * Copyright: linyunsheng@huawei.com
+ */
+
+#include <linux/mm.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
+#include <linux/atomic.h>
+#include <linux/irqflags.h>
+#include <linux/cpumask.h>
+#include <linux/log2.h>
+#include <linux/completion.h>
+#include <linux/kthread.h>
+
+#define OBJPOOL_NR_OBJECT_MAX	BIT(24)
+
+struct objpool_slot {
+	u32 head;
+	u32 tail;
+	u32 last;
+	u32 mask;
+	void *entries[];
+} __packed;
+
+struct objpool_head {
+	int nr_cpus;
+	int capacity;
+	struct objpool_slot **cpu_slots;
+};
+
+/* initialize percpu objpool_slot */
+static void objpool_init_percpu_slot(struct objpool_head *pool,
+				     struct objpool_slot *slot)
+{
+	/* initialize elements of percpu objpool_slot */
+	slot->mask = pool->capacity - 1;
+}
+
+/* allocate and initialize percpu slots */
+static int objpool_init_percpu_slots(struct objpool_head *pool,
+				     int nr_objs, gfp_t gfp)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < pool->nr_cpus; i++) {
+		struct objpool_slot *slot;
+		int size;
+
+		/* skip the cpu node which could never be present */
+		if (!cpu_possible(i))
+			continue;
+
+		size = struct_size(slot, entries, pool->capacity);
+
+		/*
+		 * here we allocate percpu-slot & objs together in a single
+		 * allocation to make it more compact, taking advantage of
+		 * warm caches and TLB hits. in default vmalloc is used to
+		 * reduce the pressure of kernel slab system. as we know,
+		 * minimal size of vmalloc is one page since vmalloc would
+		 * always align the requested size to page size
+		 */
+		if (gfp & GFP_ATOMIC)
+			slot = kmalloc_node(size, gfp, cpu_to_node(i));
+		else
+			slot = __vmalloc_node(size, sizeof(void *), gfp,
+					      cpu_to_node(i),
+					      __builtin_return_address(0));
+		if (!slot)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+
+		memset(slot, 0, size);
+		pool->cpu_slots[i] = slot;
+
+		objpool_init_percpu_slot(pool, slot);
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/* cleanup all percpu slots of the object pool */
+static void objpool_fini_percpu_slots(struct objpool_head *pool)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	if (!pool->cpu_slots)
+		return;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < pool->nr_cpus; i++)
+		kvfree(pool->cpu_slots[i]);
+	kfree(pool->cpu_slots);
+}
+
+/* initialize object pool and pre-allocate objects */
+static int objpool_init(struct objpool_head *pool, int nr_objs, gfp_t gfp)
+{
+	int rc, capacity, slot_size;
+
+	/* check input parameters */
+	if (nr_objs <= 0 || nr_objs > OBJPOOL_NR_OBJECT_MAX)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	/* calculate capacity of percpu objpool_slot */
+	capacity = roundup_pow_of_two(nr_objs);
+	if (!capacity)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	gfp = gfp & ~__GFP_ZERO;
+
+	/* initialize objpool pool */
+	memset(pool, 0, sizeof(struct objpool_head));
+	pool->nr_cpus = nr_cpu_ids;
+	pool->capacity = capacity;
+	slot_size = pool->nr_cpus * sizeof(struct objpool_slot *);
+	pool->cpu_slots = kzalloc(slot_size, gfp);
+	if (!pool->cpu_slots)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	/* initialize per-cpu slots */
+	rc = objpool_init_percpu_slots(pool, nr_objs, gfp);
+	if (rc)
+		objpool_fini_percpu_slots(pool);
+
+	return rc;
+}
+
+/* adding object to slot, abort if the slot was already full */
+static int objpool_try_add_slot(void *obj, struct objpool_head *pool, int cpu)
+{
+	struct objpool_slot *slot = pool->cpu_slots[cpu];
+	u32 head, tail;
+
+	/* loading tail and head as a local snapshot, tail first */
+	tail = READ_ONCE(slot->tail);
+
+	do {
+		head = READ_ONCE(slot->head);
+		/* fault caught: something must be wrong */
+		if (unlikely(tail - head >= pool->capacity))
+			return -ENOSPC;
+	} while (!try_cmpxchg_acquire(&slot->tail, &tail, tail + 1));
+
+	/* now the tail position is reserved for the given obj */
+	WRITE_ONCE(slot->entries[tail & slot->mask], obj);
+	/* update sequence to make this obj available for pop() */
+	smp_store_release(&slot->last, tail + 1);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/* reclaim an object to object pool */
+static int objpool_push(void *obj, struct objpool_head *pool)
+{
+	unsigned long flags;
+	int rc;
+
+	/* disable local irq to avoid preemption & interruption */
+	raw_local_irq_save(flags);
+	rc = objpool_try_add_slot(obj, pool, raw_smp_processor_id());
+	raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
+
+	return rc;
+}
+
+/* try to retrieve object from slot */
+static void *objpool_try_get_slot(struct objpool_head *pool, int cpu)
+{
+	struct objpool_slot *slot = pool->cpu_slots[cpu];
+	/* load head snapshot, other cpus may change it */
+	u32 head = smp_load_acquire(&slot->head);
+
+	while (head != READ_ONCE(slot->last)) {
+		void *obj;
+
+		/*
+		 * data visibility of 'last' and 'head' could be out of
+		 * order since memory updating of 'last' and 'head' are
+		 * performed in push() and pop() independently
+		 *
+		 * before any retrieving attempts, pop() must guarantee
+		 * 'last' is behind 'head', that is to say, there must
+		 * be available objects in slot, which could be ensured
+		 * by condition 'last != head && last - head <= nr_objs'
+		 * that is equivalent to 'last - head - 1 < nr_objs' as
+		 * 'last' and 'head' are both unsigned int32
+		 */
+		if (READ_ONCE(slot->last) - head - 1 >= pool->capacity) {
+			head = READ_ONCE(slot->head);
+			continue;
+		}
+
+		/* obj must be retrieved before moving forward head */
+		obj = READ_ONCE(slot->entries[head & slot->mask]);
+
+		/* move head forward to mark it's consumption */
+		if (try_cmpxchg_release(&slot->head, &head, head + 1))
+			return obj;
+	}
+
+	return NULL;
+}
+
+/* allocate an object from object pool */
+static void *objpool_pop(struct objpool_head *pool)
+{
+	void *obj = NULL;
+	unsigned long flags;
+	int i, cpu;
+
+	/* disable local irq to avoid preemption & interruption */
+	raw_local_irq_save(flags);
+
+	cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
+	for (i = 0; i < num_possible_cpus(); i++) {
+		obj = objpool_try_get_slot(pool, cpu);
+		if (obj)
+			break;
+		cpu = cpumask_next_wrap(cpu, cpu_possible_mask, -1, 1);
+	}
+	raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
+
+	return obj;
+}
+
+/* release whole objpool forcely */
+static void objpool_free(struct objpool_head *pool)
+{
+	if (!pool->cpu_slots)
+		return;
+
+	/* release percpu slots */
+	objpool_fini_percpu_slots(pool);
+}
+
+static struct objpool_head ptr_pool;
+static int nr_objs = 512;
+static atomic_t nthreads;
+static struct completion wait;
+static struct page_frag_cache test_frag;
+
+static int nr_test = 5120000;
+module_param(nr_test, int, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(nr_test, "number of iterations to test");
+
+static bool test_align;
+module_param(test_align, bool, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(bool, "use align API for testing");
+
+static int test_push_cpu;
+module_param(test_push_cpu, int, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_push_cpu, "test cpu for pushing fragment");
+
+static int test_pop_cpu;
+module_param(test_pop_cpu, int, 0600);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_pop_cpu, "test cpu for popping fragment");
+
+static int page_frag_pop_thread(void *arg)
+{
+	struct objpool_head *pool = arg;
+	int nr = nr_test;
+
+	pr_info("page_frag pop test thread begins on cpu %d\n",
+		smp_processor_id());
+
+	while (nr > 0) {
+		void *obj = objpool_pop(pool);
+
+		if (obj) {
+			nr--;
+			page_frag_free(obj);
+		} else {
+			cond_resched();
+		}
+	}
+
+	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&nthreads))
+		complete(&wait);
+
+	pr_info("page_frag pop test thread exits on cpu %d\n",
+		smp_processor_id());
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int page_frag_push_thread(void *arg)
+{
+	struct objpool_head *pool = arg;
+	int nr = nr_test;
+
+	pr_info("page_frag push test thread begins on cpu %d\n",
+		smp_processor_id());
+
+	while (nr > 0) {
+		unsigned int size = get_random_u32();
+		void *va;
+		int ret;
+
+		size = clamp(size, 1U, PAGE_SIZE);
+		if (test_align)
+			va = page_frag_alloc_align(&test_frag, size, GFP_KERNEL,
+						   SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+		else
+			va = page_frag_alloc(&test_frag, size, GFP_KERNEL);
+
+		if (!va)
+			continue;
+
+		ret = objpool_push(va, pool);
+		if (ret) {
+			page_frag_free(va);
+			cond_resched();
+		} else {
+			nr--;
+		}
+	}
+
+	pr_info("page_frag push test thread exits on cpu %d\n",
+		smp_processor_id());
+
+	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&nthreads))
+		complete(&wait);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int __init page_frag_test_init(void)
+{
+	struct task_struct *tsk_push, *tsk_pop;
+	ktime_t start;
+	u64 duration;
+	int ret;
+
+	test_frag.va = NULL;
+	atomic_set(&nthreads, 2);
+	init_completion(&wait);
+
+	ret = objpool_init(&ptr_pool, nr_objs, GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+
+	tsk_push = kthread_create_on_cpu(page_frag_push_thread, &ptr_pool,
+					 test_push_cpu, "page_frag_push");
+	if (IS_ERR(tsk_push))
+		return PTR_ERR(tsk_push);
+
+	tsk_pop = kthread_create_on_cpu(page_frag_pop_thread, &ptr_pool,
+					test_pop_cpu, "page_frag_pop");
+	if (IS_ERR(tsk_pop)) {
+		kthread_stop(tsk_push);
+		return PTR_ERR(tsk_pop);
+	}
+
+	start = ktime_get();
+	wake_up_process(tsk_push);
+	wake_up_process(tsk_pop);
+
+	pr_info("waiting for test to complete\n");
+	wait_for_completion(&wait);
+
+	duration = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get(), start);
+	pr_info("%d of iterations for %s testing took: %lluus\n", nr_test,
+		test_align ? "aligned" : "non-aligned", duration);
+
+	objpool_free(&ptr_pool);
+	page_frag_cache_drain(&test_frag);
+
+	return -EAGAIN;
+}
+
+static void __exit page_frag_test_exit(void)
+{
+}
+
+module_init(page_frag_test_init);
+module_exit(page_frag_test_exit);
+
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Test module for page_frag");