bpf: avoid grabbing spin_locks of all cpus when no free elems
This patch use head->first in pcpu_freelist_head to check freelist having free or not. If having, grab spin_lock, or check next cpu's freelist. Before patch: hash_map performance ./map_perf_test 1 0:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 1043397 events per sec ... The average of the test results is around 1050000 events per sec. hash_map the worst: no free ./run_bench_bpf_hashmap_full_update.sh Setting up benchmark 'bpf-hashmap-ful-update'... Benchmark 'bpf-hashmap-ful-update' started. 1:hash_map_full_perf 15687 events per sec ... The average of the test results is around 16000 events per sec. ftrace trace: 0) | htab_map_update_elem() { 0) | __pcpu_freelist_pop() { 0) | _raw_spin_lock() 0) | _raw_spin_unlock() 0) | ... 0) + 25.188 us | } 0) + 28.439 us | } The test machine is 16C, trying to get spin_lock 17 times, in addition to 16c, there is an extralist. after patch: hash_map performance ./map_perf_test 1 0:hash_map_perf pre-alloc 1053298 events per sec ... The average of the test results is around 1050000 events per sec. hash_map worst: no free ./run_bench_bpf_hashmap_full_update.sh Setting up benchmark 'bpf-hashmap-ful-update'... Benchmark 'bpf-hashmap-ful-update' started. 1:hash_map_full_perf 555830 events per sec ... The average of the test results is around 550000 events per sec. ftrace trace: 0) | htab_map_update_elem() { 0) | alloc_htab_elem() { 0) 0.586 us | __pcpu_freelist_pop(); 0) 0.945 us | } 0) 8.669 us | } It can be seen that after adding this patch, the map performance is almost not degraded, and when free=0, first check head->first instead of directly acquiring spin_lock. Co-developed-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@bytedance.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220610023308.93798-2-zhoufeng.zf@bytedance.comSigned-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment