On 10.04.2012 20:19, Alan Cox wrote:
On 04/09/2012 10:26, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday, April 05, 2012 11:54:31 am Alan Cox wrote:
On 04/04/2012 02:17, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 11:02:53PM +0400, Andrey Zonov wrote:
Hi,

I open the file, then call mmap() on the whole file and get pointer,
then I work with this pointer. I expect that page should be only once
touched to get it into the memory (disk cache?), but this doesn't
work!

I wrote the test (attached) and ran it for the 1G file generated from
/dev/random, the result is the following:

Prepare file:
# swapoff -a
# newfs /dev/ada0b
# mount /dev/ada0b /mnt
# dd if=/dev/random of=/mnt/random-1024 bs=1m count=1024

Purge cache:
# umount /mnt
# mount /dev/ada0b /mnt

Run test:
$ ./mmap /mnt/random-1024 30
mmap: 1 pass took: 7.431046 (none: 262112; res: 32; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 2 pass took: 7.356670 (none: 261648; res: 496; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 3 pass took: 7.307094 (none: 260521; res: 1623; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 4 pass took: 7.350239 (none: 258904; res: 3240; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 5 pass took: 7.392480 (none: 257286; res: 4858; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 6 pass took: 7.292069 (none: 255584; res: 6560; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 7 pass took: 7.048980 (none: 251142; res: 11002; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 8 pass took: 6.899387 (none: 247584; res: 14560; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 9 pass took: 7.190579 (none: 242992; res: 19152; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 10 pass took: 6.915482 (none: 239308; res: 22836; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 11 pass took: 6.565909 (none: 232835; res: 29309; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 12 pass took: 6.423945 (none: 226160; res: 35984; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 13 pass took: 6.315385 (none: 208555; res: 53589; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 14 pass took: 6.760780 (none: 192805; res: 69339; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 15 pass took: 5.721513 (none: 174497; res: 87647; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 16 pass took: 5.004424 (none: 155938; res: 106206; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 17 pass took: 4.224926 (none: 135639; res: 126505; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 18 pass took: 3.749608 (none: 117952; res: 144192; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 19 pass took: 3.398084 (none: 99066; res: 163078; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 20 pass took: 3.029557 (none: 74994; res: 187150; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 21 pass took: 2.379430 (none: 55231; res: 206913; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 22 pass took: 2.046521 (none: 40786; res: 221358; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 23 pass took: 1.152797 (none: 30311; res: 231833; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 24 pass took: 0.972617 (none: 16196; res: 245948; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 25 pass took: 0.577515 (none: 8286; res: 253858; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 26 pass took: 0.380738 (none: 3712; res: 258432; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 27 pass took: 0.253583 (none: 1193; res: 260951; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 28 pass took: 0.157508 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 29 pass took: 0.156169 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 30 pass took: 0.156550 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)

If I ran this:
$ cat /mnt/random-1024> /dev/null
before test, when result is the following:

$ ./mmap /mnt/random-1024 5
mmap: 1 pass took: 0.337657 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 2 pass took: 0.186137 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 3 pass took: 0.186132 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 4 pass took: 0.186535 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)
mmap: 5 pass took: 0.190353 (none: 0; res: 262144; super:
0; other: 0)

This is what I expect. But why this doesn't work without reading file
manually?
Issue seems to be in some change of the behaviour of the reserv or
phys allocator. I Cc:ed Alan.
I'm pretty sure that the behavior here hasn't significantly changed in
about twelve years. Otherwise, I agree with your analysis.

On more than one occasion, I've been tempted to change:

pmap_remove_all(mt);
if (mt->dirty != 0)
vm_page_deactivate(mt);
else
vm_page_cache(mt);

to:

vm_page_dontneed(mt);

because I suspect that the current code does more harm than good. In
theory, it saves activations of the page daemon. However, more often
than not, I suspect that we are spending more on page reactivations than
we are saving on page daemon activations. The sequential access
detection heuristic is just too easily triggered. For example, I've
seen it triggered by demand paging of the gcc text segment. Also, I
think that pmap_remove_all() and especially vm_page_cache() are too
severe for a detection heuristic that is so easily triggered.
Are you planning to commit this?


Not yet. I did some tests with a file that was several times larger than
DRAM, and I didn't like what I saw. Initially, everything behaved as
expected, but about halfway through the test the bulk of the pages were
active. Despite the call to pmap_clear_reference() in
vm_page_dontneed(), the page daemon is finding the pages to be
referenced and reactivating them. The net result is that the time it
takes to read the file (from a relatively fast SSD) goes up by about
12%. So, this still needs work.


Hi Alan,

What do you think about attached patch?


--
Andrey Zonov
Index: sys/vm/vm_fault.c
===================================================================
--- sys/vm/vm_fault.c   (revision 233744)
+++ sys/vm/vm_fault.c   (working copy)
@@ -114,9 +114,9 @@
 static int vm_fault_additional_pages(vm_page_t, int, int, vm_page_t *, int *);
 static void vm_fault_prefault(pmap_t, vm_offset_t, vm_map_entry_t);
 
-#define VM_FAULT_READ_AHEAD 8
-#define VM_FAULT_READ_BEHIND 7
-#define VM_FAULT_READ (VM_FAULT_READ_AHEAD+VM_FAULT_READ_BEHIND+1)
+#define VM_FAULT_READ_AHEAD    (MAXPHYS/PAGE_SIZE/2)
+#define VM_FAULT_READ_BEHIND   (VM_FAULT_READ_AHEAD-1)
+#define VM_FAULT_READ          (VM_FAULT_READ_AHEAD+VM_FAULT_READ_BEHIND+1)
 
 struct faultstate {
        vm_page_t m;
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to