xfs: separate read-only variables in struct xfs_mount
Seeing massive cpu usage from xfs_agino_range() on one machine; instruction level profiles look similar to another machine running the same workload, only one machine is consuming 10x as much CPU as the other and going much slower. The only real difference between the two machines is core count per socket. Both are running identical 16p/16GB virtual machine configurations Machine A: 25.83% [k] xfs_agino_range 12.68% [k] __xfs_dir3_data_check 6.95% [k] xfs_verify_ino 6.78% [k] xfs_dir2_data_entry_tag_p 3.56% [k] xfs_buf_find 2.31% [k] xfs_verify_dir_ino 2.02% [k] xfs_dabuf_map.constprop.0 1.65% [k] xfs_ag_block_count And takes around 13 minutes to remove 50 million inodes. Machine B: 13.90% [k] __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath 3.76% [k] do_raw_spin_lock 2.83% [k] xfs_dir3_leaf_check_int 2.75% [k] xfs_agino_range 2.51% [k] __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock 2.18% [k] __xfs_dir3_data_check 2.02% [k] xfs_log_commit_cil And takes around 5m30s to remove 50 million inodes. Suspect is cacheline contention on m_sectbb_log which is used in one of the macros in xfs_agino_range. This is a read-only variable but shares a cacheline with m_active_trans which is a global atomic that gets bounced all around the machine. The workload is trying to run hundreds of thousands of transactions per second and hence cacheline contention will be occurring on this atomic counter. Hence xfs_agino_range() is likely just be an innocent bystander as the cache coherency protocol fights over the cacheline between CPU cores and sockets. On machine A, this rearrangement of the struct xfs_mount results in the profile changing to: 9.77% [kernel] [k] xfs_agino_range 6.27% [kernel] [k] __xfs_dir3_data_check 5.31% [kernel] [k] __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath 4.54% [kernel] [k] xfs_buf_find 3.79% [kernel] [k] do_raw_spin_lock 3.39% [kernel] [k] xfs_verify_ino 2.73% [kernel] [k] __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock Vastly less CPU usage in xfs_agino_range(), but still 3x the amount of machine B and still runs substantially slower than it should. Current rm -rf of 50 million files: vanilla patched machine A 13m20s 6m42s machine B 5m30s 5m02s It's an improvement, hence indicating that separation and further optimisation of read-only global filesystem data is worthwhile, but it clearly isn't the underlying issue causing this specific performance degradation. Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment