From patchwork Mon Jun 3 17:03:04 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Nitesh Narayan Lal X-Patchwork-Id: 10973487 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEE8976 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D369228630 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id C623628684; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:04:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A99D28630 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:04:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727486AbfFCREC (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:04:02 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23948 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727430AbfFCREB (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:04:01 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D267AC028353; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:03:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from virtlab512.virt.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com (virtlab512.virt.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com [10.19.152.206]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9238960C66; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:03:41 +0000 (UTC) From: Nitesh Narayan Lal To: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com, pagupta@redhat.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com, yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com, riel@surriel.com, david@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com, dodgen@google.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, dhildenb@redhat.com, aarcange@redhat.com, alexander.duyck@gmail.com Subject: [RFC][Patch v10 0/2] mm: Support for page hinting Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:03:04 -0400 Message-Id: <20190603170306.49099-1-nitesh@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]); Mon, 03 Jun 2019 17:04:01 +0000 (UTC) Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP This patch series proposes an efficient mechanism for communicating free memory from a guest to its hypervisor. It especially enables guests with no page cache (e.g., nvdimm, virtio-pmem) or with small page caches (e.g., ram > disk) to rapidly hand back free memory to the hypervisor. This approach has a minimal impact on the existing core-mm infrastructure. Measurement results (measurement details appended to this email): * With active page hinting, 3 more guests could be launched each of 5 GB(total 5 vs. 2) on a 15GB (single NUMA) system without swapping. * With active page hinting, on a system with 15 GB of (single NUMA) memory and 4GB of swap, the runtime of "memhog 6G" in 3 guests (run sequentially) resulted in the last invocation to only need 37s compared to 3m35s without page hinting. This approach tracks all freed pages of the order MAX_ORDER - 2 in bitmaps. A new hook after buddy merging is used to set the bits in the bitmap. Currently, the bits are only cleared when pages are hinted, not when pages are re-allocated. Bitmaps are stored on a per-zone basis and are protected by the zone lock. A workqueue asynchronously processes the bitmaps as soon as a pre-defined memory threshold is met, trying to isolate and report pages that are still free. The isolated pages are reported via virtio-balloon, which is responsible for sending batched pages to the host synchronously. Once the hypervisor processed the hinting request, the isolated pages are returned back to the buddy. The key changes made in this series compared to v9[1] are: * Pages only in the chunks of "MAX_ORDER - 2" are reported to the hypervisor to not break up the THP. * At a time only a set of 16 pages can be isolated and reported to the host to avoids any false OOMs. * page_hinting.c is moved under mm/ from virt/kvm/ as the feature is dependent on virtio and not on KVM itself. This would enable any other hypervisor to use this feature by implementing virtio devices. * The sysctl variable is replaced with a virtio-balloon parameter to enable/disable page-hinting. Pending items: * Test device assigned guests to ensure that hinting doesn't break it. * Follow up on VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_PAGE_POISON's device side support. * Compare reporting free pages via vring with vhost. * Decide between MADV_DONTNEED and MADV_FREE. * Look into memory hotplug, more efficient locking, possible races when disabling. * Come up with proper/traceable error-message/logs. * Minor reworks and simplifications (e.g., virtio protocol). Benefit analysis: 1. Use-case - Number of guests that can be launched without swap usage NUMA Nodes = 1 with 15 GB memory Guest Memory = 5 GB Number of cores in guest = 1 Workload = test allocation program allocates 4GB memory, touches it via memset and exits. Procedure = The first guest is launched and once its console is up, the test allocation program is executed with 4 GB memory request (Due to this the guest occupies almost 4-5 GB of memory in the host in a system without page hinting). Once this program exits at that time another guest is launched in the host and the same process is followed. It is continued until the swap is not used. Results: Without hinting = 3, swap usage at the end 1.1GB. With hinting = 5, swap usage at the end 0. 2. Use-case - memhog execution time Guest Memory = 6GB Number of cores = 4 NUMA Nodes = 1 with 15 GB memory Process: 3 Guests are launched and the ‘memhog 6G’ execution time is monitored one after the other in each of them. Without Hinting - Guest1:47s, Guest2:53s, Guest3:3m35s, End swap usage: 3.5G With Hinting - Guest1:40s, Guest2:44s, Guest3:37s, End swap usage: 0 Performance analysis: 1. will-it-scale's page_faul1: Guest Memory = 6GB Number of cores = 24 Without Hinting: tasks,processes,processes_idle,threads,threads_idle,linear 0,0,100,0,100,0 1,315890,95.82,317633,95.83,317633 2,570810,91.67,531147,91.94,635266 3,826491,87.54,713545,88.53,952899 4,1087434,83.40,901215,85.30,1270532 5,1277137,79.26,916442,83.74,1588165 6,1503611,75.12,1113832,79.89,1905798 7,1683750,70.99,1140629,78.33,2223431 8,1893105,66.85,1157028,77.40,2541064 9,2046516,62.50,1179445,76.48,2858697 10,2291171,58.57,1209247,74.99,3176330 11,2486198,54.47,1217265,75.13,3493963 12,2656533,50.36,1193392,74.42,3811596 13,2747951,46.21,1185540,73.45,4129229 14,2965757,42.09,1161862,72.20,4446862 15,3049128,37.97,1185923,72.12,4764495 16,3150692,33.83,1163789,70.70,5082128 17,3206023,29.70,1174217,70.11,5399761 18,3211380,25.62,1179660,69.40,5717394 19,3202031,21.44,1181259,67.28,6035027 20,3218245,17.35,1196367,66.75,6352660 21,3228576,13.26,1129561,66.74,6670293 22,3207452,9.15,1166517,66.47,6987926 23,3153800,5.09,1172877,61.57,7305559 24,3184542,0.99,1186244,58.36,7623192 With Hinting: 0,0,100,0,100,0 1,306737,95.82,305130,95.78,306737 2,573207,91.68,530453,91.92,613474 3,810319,87.53,695281,88.58,920211 4,1074116,83.40,880602,85.48,1226948 5,1308283,79.26,1109257,81.23,1533685 6,1501987,75.12,1093661,80.19,1840422 7,1695300,70.99,1104207,79.03,2147159 8,1901523,66.85,1193613,76.90,2453896 9,2051288,62.73,1200913,76.22,2760633 10,2275771,58.60,1192992,75.66,3067370 11,2435016,54.48,1191472,74.66,3374107 12,2623114,50.35,1196911,74.02,3680844 13,2766071,46.22,1178589,73.02,3987581 14,2932163,42.10,1166414,72.96,4294318 15,3000853,37.96,1177177,72.62,4601055 16,3113738,33.85,1165444,70.54,4907792 17,3132135,29.77,1165055,68.51,5214529 18,3175121,25.69,1166969,69.27,5521266 19,3205490,21.61,1159310,65.65,5828003 20,3220855,17.52,1171827,62.04,6134740 21,3182568,13.48,1138918,65.05,6441477 22,3130543,9.30,1128185,60.60,6748214 23,3087426,5.15,1127912,55.36,7054951 24,3099457,1.04,1176100,54.96,7361688 [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/6/413