[PATCH v11 2/2] gpu/tests/buddy: add dirty tracker performance KUnit test

Arunpravin Paneer Selvam <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-xe
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Add gpu_test_buddy_dirty_tracker_performance to demonstrate the key
advantage of the decoupled dirty-tracker design over the old dual-tree
/ force_merge approach.

The test runs two scenarios on a 4 GiB pool after alternating
clear/dirty fragmentation at 4 KiB granularity:

  1. Contiguous 2 GiB alloc: smaller than the 4 GiB span so it routes
     through the contiguous allocator rather than the exact-range fast
     path.  The old design requires __force_merge() to rebuild the
     block; the new design coalesces during free() so the alloc is
     O(log N).

       old (force_merge) - 45 ms
       dirty tracker design - 11 ms

  2. Repeated 256 KiB alloc throughput: the old design pays
     __force_merge() on every alloc; the new design does not.

       old (force_merge) - 86 ms
       dirty tracker design - 20 ms

v2:
 - Force a contiguous 256 KiB allocation in the repeated-alloc loop so
   the baseline actually exercises __force_merge(). (sashiko)

v3:
 - Make the first test allocate 2 GiB instead of the full 4 GiB pool,
   so it really uses the contiguous path; update the numbers. (sashiko)

Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
Cc: Matthew Auld <[email protected]>
Cc: Christian König <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arunpravin Paneer Selvam <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 116 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c b/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
index 6ce485eae83e..b75d32ca6ca0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/tests/gpu_buddy_test.c
@@ -283,6 +283,121 @@ static void gpu_test_buddy_fragmentation_performance(struct kunit *test)
 	gpu_buddy_fini(&mm);
 }
 
+static void gpu_test_buddy_dirty_tracker_performance(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	struct gpu_buddy_block *block, *tmp;
+	unsigned long elapsed_ms;
+	LIST_HEAD(clear_blocks);
+	LIST_HEAD(dirty_blocks);
+	LIST_HEAD(allocated);
+	struct gpu_buddy mm;
+	LIST_HEAD(results);
+	ktime_t start, end;
+	int i, count;
+
+	/*
+	 * Contiguous alloc latency after alternating clear/dirty fragmentation
+	 *
+	 * Fill a 4 GiB pool with 4 KiB allocations, partition them into
+	 * alternating cleared and dirty sets, then free both.  In the old
+	 * dual-tree design every adjacent buddy pair has one cleared half and
+	 * one dirty half, so the pair sits on opposite sides of the clear/dirty
+	 * merge barrier and cannot be coalesced at free() time.  The pool
+	 * stays fully fragmented and the subsequent contiguous 2 GiB allocation
+	 * (smaller than the 4 GiB span so it routes through the contiguous
+	 * allocator rather than the exact-range fast path) has to invoke
+	 * __force_merge() to rebuild a 2 GiB block before it can succeed.  With
+	 * the dirty-tracker design buddy pairs coalesce unconditionally during
+	 * free(), so the pool is already at max_order before the timed alloc
+	 * begins and __force_merge() is not needed.
+	 */
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test, gpu_buddy_init(&mm, SZ_4G, SZ_4K),
+			       "buddy_init failed\n");
+
+	for (i = 0; i < SZ_4G / SZ_4K; i++)
+		KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test,
+				       gpu_buddy_alloc_blocks(&mm, 0, SZ_4G, SZ_4K, SZ_4K,
+							      &allocated, 0),
+				       "buddy_alloc hit an error size=%u\n", SZ_4K);
+
+	count = 0;
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(block, tmp, &allocated, link) {
+		if (count++ % 2 == 0)
+			list_move_tail(&block->link, &clear_blocks);
+		else
+			list_move_tail(&block->link, &dirty_blocks);
+	}
+
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &clear_blocks, GPU_BUDDY_CLEARED);
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &dirty_blocks, 0);
+
+	start = ktime_get();
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test,
+			       gpu_buddy_alloc_blocks(&mm, 0, SZ_4G, SZ_2G, SZ_2G,
+						      &results,
+						      GPU_BUDDY_CONTIGUOUS_ALLOCATION),
+			       "contiguous alloc failed\n");
+	end = ktime_get();
+	elapsed_ms = ktime_to_ms(ktime_sub(end, start));
+
+	kunit_info(test, "Contiguous alloc after fragmentation: %lu ms\n",
+		   elapsed_ms);
+
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &results, 0);
+	gpu_buddy_fini(&mm);
+
+	/*
+	 * Repeated alloc throughput from a maximally fragmented pool
+	 *
+	 * Fill a 4 GiB pool with 4 KiB allocations, free even-indexed blocks
+	 * as cleared and odd-indexed blocks as dirty.  The alternating pattern
+	 * ensures every adjacent buddy pair has one cleared half and one dirty
+	 * half, so each pair lands on opposite sides of the old merge barrier.
+	 * Each of the 16 384 x 256 KiB allocations in the timed loop asks for a
+	 * single contiguous block (size == min_block_size, CONTIGUOUS flag), so
+	 * it cannot be satisfied by 64 stray 4 KiB blocks: under the old design
+	 * every alloc has to pay the __force_merge() cost to rebuild a 256 KiB
+	 * block.  With the dirty-tracker design the pool collapses to one
+	 * max_order block during free(), so each alloc is a simple O(log N)
+	 * split.
+	 */
+	KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test, gpu_buddy_init(&mm, SZ_4G, SZ_4K),
+			       "buddy_init failed\n");
+
+	for (i = 0; i < SZ_4G / SZ_4K; i++)
+		KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test,
+				       gpu_buddy_alloc_blocks(&mm, 0, SZ_4G, SZ_4K, SZ_4K,
+							      &allocated, 0),
+				       "buddy_alloc hit an error size=%u\n", SZ_4K);
+
+	count = 0;
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(block, tmp, &allocated, link) {
+		if (count++ % 2 == 0)
+			list_move_tail(&block->link, &clear_blocks);
+		else
+			list_move_tail(&block->link, &dirty_blocks);
+	}
+
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &clear_blocks, GPU_BUDDY_CLEARED);
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &dirty_blocks, 0);
+
+	start = ktime_get();
+	for (i = 0; i < SZ_4G / SZ_256K; i++)
+		KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test,
+				       gpu_buddy_alloc_blocks(&mm, 0, SZ_4G, SZ_256K, SZ_256K,
+							      &results,
+							      GPU_BUDDY_CONTIGUOUS_ALLOCATION),
+				       "buddy_alloc hit an error size=%u\n", SZ_256K);
+	end = ktime_get();
+	elapsed_ms = ktime_to_ms(ktime_sub(end, start));
+
+	kunit_info(test, "Repeated 256 KiB allocs from fragmented pool: %lu ms\n",
+		   elapsed_ms);
+
+	gpu_buddy_free_list(&mm, &results, 0);
+	gpu_buddy_fini(&mm);
+}
+
 static void gpu_test_buddy_alloc_range_bias(struct kunit *test)
 {
 	u32 mm_size, size, ps, bias_size, bias_start, bias_end, bias_rem;
@@ -1492,6 +1607,7 @@ static struct kunit_case gpu_buddy_tests[] = {
 	KUNIT_CASE(gpu_test_buddy_alloc_range),
 	KUNIT_CASE(gpu_test_buddy_alloc_range_bias),
 	KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(gpu_test_buddy_fragmentation_performance),
+	KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(gpu_test_buddy_dirty_tracker_performance),
 	KUNIT_CASE(gpu_test_buddy_alloc_exceeds_max_order),
 	KUNIT_CASE(gpu_test_buddy_offset_aligned_allocation),
 	KUNIT_CASE(gpu_test_buddy_subtree_offset_alignment_stress),
-- 
2.34.1
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.