From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
<andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>, <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>,
<konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>, <mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com>
Subject: [RFC] cache guard
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2023 10:34:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D87B47@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZOhzKDNixWg2GY50@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
+CC Honnappa and Konstantin, Ring lib maintainers
+CC Mattias, PRNG lib maintainer
> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, 25 August 2023 11.24
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 11:06:01AM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > +CC mempool maintainers
> >
> > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, 25 August 2023 10.23
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 08:45:12AM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > Bruce,
> > > >
> > > > With this patch [1], it is noted that the ring producer and
> consumer data
> > > should not be on adjacent cache lines, for performance reasons.
> > > >
> > > > [1]:
> > >
> https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.h?id=d9f0d3a1f
> fd4b66
> > > e75485cc8b63b9aedfbdfe8b0
> > > >
> > > > (It's obvious that they cannot share the same cache line, because
> they are
> > > accessed by two different threads.)
> > > >
> > > > Intuitively, I would think that having them on different cache
> lines would
> > > suffice. Why does having an empty cache line between them make a
> difference?
> > > >
> > > > And does it need to be an empty cache line? Or does it suffice
> having the
> > > second structure start at two cache lines after the start of the
> first
> > > structure (e.g. if the size of the first structure is two cache
> lines)?
> > > >
> > > > I'm asking because the same principle might apply to other code
> too.
> > > >
> > > Hi Morten,
> > >
> > > this was something we discovered when working on the distributor
> library.
> > > If we have cachelines per core where there is heavy access, having
> some
> > > cachelines as a gap between the content cachelines can help
> performance. We
> > > believe this helps due to avoiding issues with the HW prefetchers
> (e.g.
> > > adjacent cacheline prefetcher) bringing in the second cacheline
> > > speculatively when an operation is done on the first line.
> >
> > I guessed that it had something to do with speculative prefetching,
> but wasn't sure. Good to get confirmation, and that it has a measureable
> effect somewhere. Very interesting!
> >
> > NB: More comments in the ring lib about stuff like this would be nice.
> >
> > So, for the mempool lib, what do you think about applying the same
> technique to the rte_mempool_debug_stats structure (which is an array
> indexed per lcore)... Two adjacent lcores heavily accessing their local
> mempool caches seems likely to me. But how heavy does the access need to
> be for this technique to be relevant?
> >
>
> No idea how heavy the accesses need to be for this to have a noticable
> effect. For things like debug stats, I wonder how worthwhile making such
> a
> change would be, but then again, any change would have very low impact
> too
> in that case.
I just tried adding padding to some of the hot structures in our own application, and observed a significant performance improvement for those.
So I think this technique should have higher visibility in DPDK by adding a new cache macro to rte_common.h:
/**
* Empty cache line, to guard against speculative prefetching.
*
* Use as spacing between data accessed by different lcores,
* to prevent cache thrashing on CPUs with speculative prefetching.
*/
#define RTE_CACHE_GUARD(name) char cache_guard_##name[RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE] __rte_cache_aligned;
To be used like this:
struct rte_ring {
char name[RTE_RING_NAMESIZE] __rte_cache_aligned;
/**< Name of the ring. */
int flags; /**< Flags supplied at creation. */
const struct rte_memzone *memzone;
/**< Memzone, if any, containing the rte_ring */
uint32_t size; /**< Size of ring. */
uint32_t mask; /**< Mask (size-1) of ring. */
uint32_t capacity; /**< Usable size of ring */
- char pad0 __rte_cache_aligned; /**< empty cache line */
+ RTE_CACHE_GUARD(prod); /**< Isolate producer status. */
/** Ring producer status. */
union {
struct rte_ring_headtail prod;
struct rte_ring_hts_headtail hts_prod;
struct rte_ring_rts_headtail rts_prod;
} __rte_cache_aligned;
- char pad1 __rte_cache_aligned; /**< empty cache line */
+ RTE_CACHE_GUARD(both); /**< Isolate producer from consumer. */
/** Ring consumer status. */
union {
struct rte_ring_headtail cons;
struct rte_ring_hts_headtail hts_cons;
struct rte_ring_rts_headtail rts_cons;
} __rte_cache_aligned;
- char pad2 __rte_cache_aligned; /**< empty cache line */
+ RTE_CACHE_GUARD(cons); /**< Isolate consumer status. */
};
And for the mempool library:
#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_STATS
/**
* A structure that stores the mempool statistics (per-lcore).
* Note: Cache stats (put_cache_bulk/objs, get_cache_bulk/objs) are not
* captured since they can be calculated from other stats.
* For example: put_cache_objs = put_objs - put_common_pool_objs.
*/
struct rte_mempool_debug_stats {
uint64_t put_bulk; /**< Number of puts. */
uint64_t put_objs; /**< Number of objects successfully put. */
uint64_t put_common_pool_bulk; /**< Number of bulks enqueued in common pool. */
uint64_t put_common_pool_objs; /**< Number of objects enqueued in common pool. */
uint64_t get_common_pool_bulk; /**< Number of bulks dequeued from common pool. */
uint64_t get_common_pool_objs; /**< Number of objects dequeued from common pool. */
uint64_t get_success_bulk; /**< Successful allocation number. */
uint64_t get_success_objs; /**< Objects successfully allocated. */
uint64_t get_fail_bulk; /**< Failed allocation number. */
uint64_t get_fail_objs; /**< Objects that failed to be allocated. */
uint64_t get_success_blks; /**< Successful allocation number of contiguous blocks. */
uint64_t get_fail_blks; /**< Failed allocation number of contiguous blocks. */
+ RTE_CACHE_GUARD(debug_stats); /**< Isolation between lcores. */
} __rte_cache_aligned;
#endif
struct rte_mempool {
[...]
#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_STATS
/** Per-lcore statistics.
*
* Plus one, for unregistered non-EAL threads.
*/
struct rte_mempool_debug_stats stats[RTE_MAX_LCORE + 1];
#endif
} __rte_cache_aligned;
It also seems relevant for the PRNG library:
/lib/eal/common/rte_random.c:
struct rte_rand_state {
uint64_t z1;
uint64_t z2;
uint64_t z3;
uint64_t z4;
uint64_t z5;
+ RTE_CACHE_GUARD(z);
} __rte_cache_aligned;
/* One instance each for every lcore id-equipped thread, and one
* additional instance to be shared by all others threads (i.e., all
* unregistered non-EAL threads).
*/
static struct rte_rand_state rand_states[RTE_MAX_LCORE + 1];
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-27 8:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-25 6:45 cache thrashing question Morten Brørup
2023-08-25 8:22 ` Bruce Richardson
2023-08-25 9:06 ` Morten Brørup
2023-08-25 9:23 ` Bruce Richardson
2023-08-27 8:34 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2023-08-27 13:55 ` [RFC] cache guard Mattias Rönnblom
2023-08-27 15:40 ` Morten Brørup
2023-08-27 22:30 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-08-28 6:32 ` Morten Brørup
2023-08-28 8:46 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-08-28 9:54 ` Morten Brørup
2023-08-28 10:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2023-08-28 7:57 ` Bruce Richardson
2023-09-01 12:26 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-09-01 16:57 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-09-01 18:52 ` Morten Brørup
2023-09-04 12:07 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2023-09-04 12:48 ` Morten Brørup
2023-09-05 5:50 ` Mattias Rönnblom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D87B47@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru \
--cc=mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).