On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 02:23:09AM +0800, John Garry wrote: > Leizhen reported some time ago that IOVA performance may degrade over time > [0], but unfortunately his solution to fix this problem was not given > attention. > > To summarize, the issue is that as time goes by, the CPU rcache and depot > rcache continue to grow. As such, IOVA RB tree access time also continues > to grow. > > At a certain point, a depot may become full, and also some CPU rcaches may > also be full when inserting another IOVA is attempted. For this scenario, > currently the "loaded" CPU rcache is freed and a new one is created. This > freeing means that many IOVAs in the RB tree need to be freed, which > makes IO throughput performance fall off a cliff in some storage scenarios: > > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6314MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1616K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [5669MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1451K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6031MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1544K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6673MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1708K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6705MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1717K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6031MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1544K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6761MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1731K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6705MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1717K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6685MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1711K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6178MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1582K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [6731MB/0KB/0KB /s] [1723K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [2387MB/0KB/0KB /s] [611K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [2689MB/0KB/0KB /s] [688K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [2278MB/0KB/0KB /s] [583K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [1288MB/0KB/0KB /s] [330K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [1632MB/0KB/0KB /s] [418K/0/0 > iops] > Jobs: 12 (f=12): [RRRRRRRRRRRR] [0.0% done] [1765MB/0KB/0KB /s] [452K/0/0 > iops] > > And continue in this fashion, without recovering. Note that in this > example it was required to wait 16 hours for this to occur. Also note that > IO throughput also becomes gradually becomes more unstable leading up to > this point. > > This problem is only seen for non-strict mode. For strict mode, the rcaches > stay quite compact.
It would be good to understand why the rcache doesn't stabilize. Could be a bug, or just need some tuning In strict mode, if a driver does Alloc-Free-Alloc and the first alloc misses the rcache, the second allocation hits it. The same sequence in non-strict mode misses the cache twice, because the IOVA is added to the flush queue on Free. So rather than AFAFAF.. we get AAA..FFF.., only once the fq_timer triggers or the FQ is full. Interestingly the FQ size is 2x IOVA_MAG_SIZE, so we could allocate 2 magazines worth of fresh IOVAs before alloc starts hitting the cache. If a job allocates more than that, some magazines are going to the depot, and with multi-CPU jobs those will get used on other CPUs during the next alloc bursts, causing the progressive increase in rcache consumption. I wonder if setting IOVA_MAG_SIZE > IOVA_FQ_SIZE helps reuse of IOVAs? Then again I haven't worked out the details, might be entirely wrong. I'll have another look next week. Thanks, Jean > As a solution to this issue, judge that the IOVA caches have grown too big > when cached magazines need to be free, and just flush all the CPUs rcaches > instead. > > The depot rcaches, however, are not flushed, as they can be used to > immediately replenish active CPUs. > > In future, some IOVA compaction could be implemented to solve the > instability issue, which I figure could be quite complex to implement. > > [0] > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20190815121104.29140-3-thunder.leiz...@huawei.com/ > > Analyzed-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leiz...@huawei.com> > Reported-by: Xiang Chen <chenxian...@hisilicon.com> > Tested-by: Xiang Chen <chenxian...@hisilicon.com> > Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.ga...@huawei.com> > Reviewed-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leiz...@huawei.com> > --- > drivers/iommu/iova.c | 16 ++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iova.c b/drivers/iommu/iova.c > index 732ee687e0e2..39b7488de8bb 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/iova.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/iova.c > @@ -841,7 +841,6 @@ static bool __iova_rcache_insert(struct iova_domain > *iovad, > struct iova_rcache *rcache, > unsigned long iova_pfn) > { > - struct iova_magazine *mag_to_free = NULL; > struct iova_cpu_rcache *cpu_rcache; > bool can_insert = false; > unsigned long flags; > @@ -863,13 +862,12 @@ static bool __iova_rcache_insert(struct iova_domain > *iovad, > if (cpu_rcache->loaded) > rcache->depot[rcache->depot_size++] = > cpu_rcache->loaded; > - } else { > - mag_to_free = cpu_rcache->loaded; > + can_insert = true; > + cpu_rcache->loaded = new_mag; > } > spin_unlock(&rcache->lock); > - > - cpu_rcache->loaded = new_mag; > - can_insert = true; > + if (!can_insert) > + iova_magazine_free(new_mag); > } > } > > @@ -878,10 +876,8 @@ static bool __iova_rcache_insert(struct iova_domain > *iovad, > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_rcache->lock, flags); > > - if (mag_to_free) { > - iova_magazine_free_pfns(mag_to_free, iovad); > - iova_magazine_free(mag_to_free); > - } > + if (!can_insert) > + free_all_cpu_cached_iovas(iovad); > > return can_insert; > } > -- > 2.26.2 > > _______________________________________________ > iommu mailing list > io...@lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
