You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
runtime: replace per-M workbuf cache with per-P gcWork cache
Currently, each M has a cache of the most recently used *workbuf. This
is used primarily by the write barrier so it doesn't have to access
the global workbuf lists on every write barrier. It's also used by
stack scanning because it's convenient.
This cache is important for write barrier performance, but this
particular approach has several downsides. It's faster than no cache,
but far from optimal (as the benchmarks below show). It's complex:
access to the cache is sprinkled through most of the workbuf list
operations and it requires special care to transform into and back out
of the gcWork cache that's actually used for scanning and marking. It
requires atomic exchanges to take ownership of the cached workbuf and
to return it to the M's cache even though it's almost always used by
only the current M. Since it's per-M, flushing these caches is O(# of
Ms), which may be high. And it has some significant subtleties: for
example, in general the cache shouldn't be used after the
harvestwbufs() in mark termination because it could hide work from
mark termination, but stack scanning can happen after this and *will*
use the cache (but it turns out this is okay because it will always be
followed by a getfull(), which drains the cache).
This change replaces this cache with a per-P gcWork object. This
gcWork cache can be used directly by scanning and marking (as long as
preemption is disabled, which is a general requirement of gcWork).
Since it's per-P, it doesn't require synchronization, which simplifies
things and means the only atomic operations in the write barrier are
occasionally fetching new work buffers and setting a mark bit if the
object isn't already marked. This cache can be flushed in O(# of Ps),
which is generally small. It follows a simple flushing rule: the cache
can be used during any phase, but during mark termination it must be
flushed before allowing preemption. This also makes the dispose during
mutator assist no longer necessary, which eliminates the vast majority
of gcWork dispose calls and reduces contention on the global workbuf
lists. And it's a lot faster on some benchmarks:
benchmark old ns/op new ns/op delta
BenchmarkBinaryTree17 11963668673 11206112763 -6.33%
BenchmarkFannkuch11 2643217136 2649182499 +0.23%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfEmpty 70.4 70.2 -0.28%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfString 364 307 -15.66%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfInt 317 282 -11.04%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfIntInt 512 483 -5.66%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfPrefixedInt 404 380 -5.94%
BenchmarkFmtFprintfFloat 521 479 -8.06%
BenchmarkFmtManyArgs 2164 1894 -12.48%
BenchmarkGobDecode 30366146 22429593 -26.14%
BenchmarkGobEncode 29867472 26663152 -10.73%
BenchmarkGzip 391236616 396779490 +1.42%
BenchmarkGunzip 96639491 96297024 -0.35%
BenchmarkHTTPClientServer 100110 70763 -29.31%
BenchmarkJSONEncode 51866051 5251138 +1.24%
BenchmarkJSONDecode 103813138 86094963 -17.07%
BenchmarkMandelbrot200 4121834 4120886 -0.02%
BenchmarkGoParse 16472789 5879949 -64.31%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchEasy0_32 140 140 +0.00%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchEasy0_1K 394 394 +0.00%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchEasy1_32 120 120 +0.00%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchEasy1_1K 621 614 -1.13%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchMedium_32 209 202 -3.35%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchMedium_1K 54889 55175 +0.52%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchHard_32 2682 2675 -0.26%
BenchmarkRegexpMatchHard_1K 79383 79524 +0.18%
BenchmarkRevcomp 584116718 584595320 +0.08%
BenchmarkTemplate 125400565 109620196 -12.58%
BenchmarkTimeParse 386 387 +0.26%
BenchmarkTimeFormat 580 447 -22.93%
(Best out of 10 runs. The delta of averages is similar.)
This also puts us in a good position to flush these caches when
nearing the end of concurrent marking, which will let us increase the
size of the work buffers while still controlling mark termination
pause time.
Change-Id: I2dd94c8517a19297a98ec280203cccaa58792522
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/9178
Run-TryBot: Austin Clements <[email protected]>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Russ Cox <[email protected]>
0 commit comments