lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Expensive memory.stat + cpu.stat reads
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 7:44 AM Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 04:22:28PM -0700, Ivan Babrou <ivan@cloudflare.com> wrote:
> > As you might've noticed from the output, splitting the loop into two
> > makes the code run 10x faster.
>
> That is curious.
>
> > We're running Linux v6.1 (the output is from v6.1.25) with no patches
> > that touch the cgroup or mm subsystems, so you can assume vanilla
> > kernel.
>
> Have you watched for this on older kernels too?

We've been on v6.1 for quite a while now, but it's possible that we
weren't paying enough attention before to notice.

> > I am happy to try out patches or to do some tracing to help understand
> > this better.
>
> I see in your reproducer you tried swapping order of controllers
> flushed.
> Have you also tried flushing same controller twice (in the inner loop)?
> (Despite the expectation is that it shouldn't be different from half the
> scenario where ran two loops.)

Same controller twice is fast (whether it's mem + mem or cpu + cpu):

warm-up
completed: 17.24s [manual / cpu-stat + mem-stat]
completed: 1.02s [manual / mem-stat+mem-stat]
completed: 0.59s [manual / cpu-stat+cpu-stat]
completed: 0.44s [manual / mem-stat]
completed: 0.16s [manual / cpu-stat]
running
completed: 14.32s [manual / cpu-stat + mem-stat]
completed: 1.25s [manual / mem-stat+mem-stat]
completed: 0.42s [manual / cpu-stat+cpu-stat]
completed: 0.12s [manual / mem-stat]
completed: 0.50s [manual / cpu-stat]

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-07-11 01:24    [W:0.125 / U:0.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site