From: 王志强 <00107082@163.com>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com, dalias@libc.org
Cc: "Quentin Rameau" <quinq@fifth.space>,
"Florian Weimer" <fweimer@redhat.com>
Subject: [musl] Re:Re: [musl] Re:Re: [musl] The heap memory performance (malloc/free/realloc) is significantly degraded in musl 1.2 (compared to 1.1)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 11:34:59 +0800 (CST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <79dd43ea.1f54.183634351be.Coremail.00107082@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220921175817.GW9709@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3561 bytes --]
Hi Rich,
Thanks for your time.
Totally agreed that in realworld application, it would take way more time to process that huge bulk of memory, compared with the average 3 microsecond per malloc&free.
At 2022-09-22 01:58:17, "Rich Felker" <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
>
>
>> Your test case, with the completely random size distribution across
>> various large sizes, is likely a worst case. The mean size you're
>> allocating is 128k, which is the threshold for direct mmap/munmap of
>> each allocation, so at least half of the allocations you're making can
>> *never* be reused, and will always be immediately unmapped on free. It
>> might be interesting to change the scaling factor from 1k to 256 bytes
>> so that basically all of the allocation sizes are in the >> malloc-managed range.
>
>One observation if this change is made: it looks like at least 70% of
>the time is spent performing madvise(MADV_FREE), and that a large
>portion of the rest (just looking at strace) seems to be repeatedly
>mapping and freeing a 17-page (68k) block, probably because this size
>happens to be at the boundary of some threshold where bounce
>protection isn't happening. I think we should look at both of these in
>more detail, since they both suggest opportunities for large
>performance improvements at low cost.
>
I have made several profiling, the report indeed show that as the size decreased, performance went up significantly and madvise now take major portion of time, as you suggested,
also madviser's portion decrease as size decrease, when average size reach to 2K, madviser was only picked by profiler less than 2%:
1. average 64K(1K~128K) malloc/free
# time ./m.alpine
real 1m 50.12s
user 0m 39.80s
sys 1m 10.17s
madvise(61.945% 52926/85440)
__libc_start_main?(22.158% 18932/85440)
malloc_usable_size?(82.870% 15689/18932)
asm_exc_page_fault(2.766% 434/15689)
main(16.781% 3177/18932)
asm_exc_page_fault(2.487% 79/3177)
malloc_usable_size?(10.969% 9372/85440)
asm_exc_page_fault(6.519% 611/9372)
munmap(2.449% 2092/85440)
exit?(1.540% 1316/85440)
2. average 32K (1K~64K) malloc/free
# time ./m.alpine
real 1m 12.89s
user 0m 30.62s
sys 0m 41.91s
madvise(60.835% 34282/56352)
__libc_start_main?(27.410% 15446/56352)
malloc_usable_size?(78.558% 12134/15446)
main(20.996% 3243/15446)
malloc_usable_size?(9.354% 5271/56352)
exit?(1.888% 1064/56352)
3. average 8K (1K~16K)
# time ./m.alpine
real 0m 42.35s
user 0m 22.94s
sys 0m 19.27s
madvise(49.338% 16169/32772)
__libc_start_main?(36.592% 11992/32772)
malloc_usable_size?(79.244% 9503/11992)
main(20.480% 2456/11992)
malloc_usable_size?(10.921% 3579/32772)
exit?(2.591% 849/32772)
4. average 4K (1k~8K)
# time ./m.debian
real 0m32.477s
user 0m31.829s
sys 0m0.596s
__libc_start_main?(44.474% 9279/20864)
malloc_usable_size?(81.410% 7554/9279)
main(17.987% 1669/9279)
madvise(37.720% 7870/20864)
malloc_usable_size?(13.986% 2918/20864)
exit?(3.350% 699/20864)
5 average 2K(128B~4096B) (madviser only about 1.7%)
# time ./m.alpine
real 0m 13.02s
user 0m 12.68s
sys 0m 0.26s
__libc_start_main?(69.538% 6974/10029)
malloc_usable_size?(80.786% 5634/6974)
main(18.569% 1295/6974)
malloc_usable_size?(21.538% 2160/10029)
exit?(7.060% 708/10029)
madvise(1.715% 172/10029)
6. average 1K (128B~2048B)
# time ./m.alpine
real 0m 10.75s
user 0m 10.68s
sys 0m 0.01s
__libc_start_main?(72.495% 6012/8293)
malloc_usable_size?(76.630% 4607/6012)
main(22.904% 1377/6012)
malloc_usable_size?(18.823% 1561/8293)
exit?(8.610% 714/8293)
David
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8386 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-22 3:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-19 7:53 baiyang
2022-09-19 11:08 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2022-09-19 12:36 ` Florian Weimer
2022-09-19 13:46 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 13:53 ` James Y Knight
2022-09-19 17:40 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 18:14 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2022-09-19 18:40 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 19:07 ` Gabriel Ravier
2022-09-19 19:21 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 21:02 ` Gabriel Ravier
2022-09-19 21:47 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 22:31 ` Gabriel Ravier
2022-09-19 22:46 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 20:46 ` Nat!
2022-09-20 8:51 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2022-09-20 0:13 ` James Y Knight
2022-09-20 0:25 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 0:38 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 0:47 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 1:00 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 1:18 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 2:15 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 2:35 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 3:28 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 3:53 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 5:41 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 5:56 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 12:16 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 17:21 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 8:33 ` Florian Weimer
2022-09-20 13:54 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-09-20 16:59 ` James Y Knight
2022-09-20 17:34 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2022-09-20 19:53 ` James Y Knight
2022-09-24 8:55 ` Fangrui Song
2022-09-20 17:39 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 18:12 ` Quentin Rameau
2022-09-20 18:19 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-20 18:26 ` Alexander Monakov
2022-09-20 18:35 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 20:33 ` Gabriel Ravier
2022-09-20 20:45 ` baiyang
2022-09-21 8:42 ` NRK
2022-09-20 18:37 ` Quentin Rameau
2022-09-21 10:15 ` [musl] " 王志强
2022-09-21 16:11 ` [musl] " 王志强
2022-09-21 17:15 ` [musl] " Rich Felker
2022-09-21 17:58 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-22 3:34 ` 王志强 [this message]
2022-09-22 9:10 ` [musl] Re:[musl] " 王志强
2022-09-22 9:39 ` [musl] " 王志强
2022-09-20 17:28 ` baiyang
2022-09-20 17:44 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-10 14:13 ` Florian Weimer
2022-09-19 13:43 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 17:32 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 18:15 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 18:44 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 19:18 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 19:45 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 20:07 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 20:17 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 20:28 ` Rich Felker
2022-09-19 20:38 ` baiyang
2022-09-19 22:02 ` Quentin Rameau
2022-09-19 20:17 ` Joakim Sindholt
2022-09-19 20:33 ` baiyang
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=79dd43ea.1f54.183634351be.Coremail.00107082@163.com \
--to=00107082@163.com \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=quinq@fifth.space \
/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.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
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).