Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] unpack-trees: optimize walking same trees with cache-tree
- From
Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 13, 2018, 18:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <f3403347-607b-b67c-297c-eeb9190a7de7@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180812081551.27927-4-pclouds@gmail.com>
On 8/12/2018 4:15 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
Show 143 quoted lines
> In order to merge one or many trees with the index, unpack-trees code
> walks multiple trees in parallel with the index and performs n-way
> merge. If we find out at start of a directory that all trees are the
> same (by comparing OID) and cache-tree happens to be available for
> that directory as well, we could avoid walking the trees because we
> already know what these trees contain: it's flattened in what's called
> "the index".
>
> The upside is of course a lot less I/O since we can potentially skip
> lots of trees (think subtrees). We also save CPU because we don't have
> to inflate and apply the deltas. The downside is of course more
> fragile code since the logic in some functions are now duplicated
> elsewhere.
>
> "checkout -" with this patch on webkit.git (275k files):
>
> baseline new
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 0.056651714 0.080394752 s: read cache .git/index
> 0.183101080 0.216010838 s: preload index
> 0.008584433 0.008534301 s: refresh index
> 0.633767589 0.251992198 s: traverse_trees
> 0.340265448 0.377031383 s: check_updates
> 0.381884638 0.372768105 s: cache_tree_update
> 1.401562947 1.045887251 s: unpack_trees
> 0.338687914 0.314983512 s: write index, changed mask = 2e
> 0.411927922 0.062572653 s: traverse_trees
> 0.000023335 0.000022544 s: check_updates
> 0.423697246 0.073795585 s: unpack_trees
> 0.423708360 0.073807557 s: diff-index
> 2.559524127 1.938191592 s: git command: git checkout -
>
> Another measurement from Ben's running "git checkout" with over 500k
> trees (on the whole series):
>
> baseline new
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 0.535510167 0.556558733 s: read cache .git/index
> 0.3057373 0.3147105 s: initialize name hash
> 0.0184082 0.023558433 s: preload index
> 0.086910967 0.089085967 s: refresh index
> 7.889590767 2.191554433 s: unpack trees
> 0.120760833 0.131941267 s: update worktree after a merge
> 2.2583504 2.572663167 s: repair cache-tree
> 0.8916137 0.959495233 s: write index, changed mask = 28
> 3.405199233 0.2710663 s: unpack trees
> 0.000999667 0.0021554 s: update worktree after a merge
> 3.4063306 0.273318333 s: diff-index
> 16.9524923 9.462943133 s: git command: git.exe checkout
>
> This command calls unpack_trees() twice, the first time on 2way merge
> and the second 1way merge. In both times, "unpack trees" time is
> reduced to one third. Overall time reduction is not that impressive of
> course because index operations take a big chunk. And there's that
> repair cache-tree line.
>
> PS. A note about cache-tree invalidation and the use of it in this
> code.
>
> We do invalidate cache-tree in _source_ index when we add new entries
> to the (temporary) "result" index. But we also use the cache-tree from
> source index in this optimization. Does this mean we end up having no
> cache-tree in the source index to activate this optimization?
>
> The answer is twisted: the order of finding a good cache-tree and
> invalidating it matters. In this case we check for a good cache-tree
> first in all_trees_same_as_cache_tree(), then we start to merge things
> and potentially invalidate that same cache-tree in the process. Since
> cache-tree invalidation happens after the optimization kicks in, we're
> still good. But we may lose that cache-tree at the very first
> call_unpack_fn() call in traverse_by_cache_tree().
>
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---
> unpack-trees.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 127 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index b237eaa0f2..07456d0fb2 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -644,6 +644,102 @@ static inline int are_same_oid(struct name_entry *name_j, struct name_entry *nam
> return name_j->oid && name_k->oid && !oidcmp(name_j->oid, name_k->oid);
> }
>
> +static int all_trees_same_as_cache_tree(int n, unsigned long dirmask,
> + struct name_entry *names,
> + struct traverse_info *info)
> +{
> + struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!o->merge || dirmask != ((1 << n) - 1))
> + return 0;
> +
> + for (i = 1; i < n; i++)
> + if (!are_same_oid(names, names + i))
> + return 0;
> +
> + return cache_tree_matches_traversal(o->src_index->cache_tree, names, info);
> +}
> +
> +static int index_pos_by_traverse_info(struct name_entry *names,
> + struct traverse_info *info)
> +{
> + struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data;
> + int len = traverse_path_len(info, names);
> + char *name = xmalloc(len + 1 /* slash */ + 1 /* NUL */);
> + int pos;
> +
> + make_traverse_path(name, info, names);
> + name[len++] = '/';
> + name[len] = '\0';
> + pos = index_name_pos(o->src_index, name, len);
> + if (pos >= 0)
> + BUG("This is a directory and should not exist in index");
> + pos = -pos - 1;
> + if (!starts_with(o->src_index->cache[pos]->name, name) ||
> + (pos > 0 && starts_with(o->src_index->cache[pos-1]->name, name)))
> + BUG("pos must point at the first entry in this directory");
> + free(name);
> + return pos;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Fast path if we detect that all trees are the same as cache-tree at this
> + * path. We'll walk these trees recursively using cache-tree/index instead of
> + * ODB since already know what these trees contain.
> + */
> +static int traverse_by_cache_tree(int pos, int nr_entries, int nr_names,
> + struct name_entry *names,
> + struct traverse_info *info)
> +{
> + struct cache_entry *src[MAX_UNPACK_TREES + 1] = { NULL, };
> + struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data;
> + int i, d;
> +
> + if (!o->merge)
> + BUG("We need cache-tree to do this optimization");
> +
> + /*
> + * Do what unpack_callback() and unpack_nondirectories() normally
> + * do. But we walk all paths recursively in just one loop instead.This comment threw me for a second. Instead of walking the paths recursively (like the old code path does), this code path actually does it in an iterative loop. How about:
"But we walk all paths in an iterative loop instead."
Show 24 quoted lines
> + *
> + * D/F conflicts and higher stage entries are not a concern
> + * because cache-tree would be invalidated and we would never
> + * get here in the first place.
> + */
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_entries; i++) {
> + struct cache_entry *tree_ce;
> + int len, rc;
> +
> + src[0] = o->src_index->cache[pos + i];
> +
> + len = ce_namelen(src[0]);
> + tree_ce = xcalloc(1, cache_entry_size(len));
> +
> + tree_ce->ce_mode = src[0]->ce_mode;
> + tree_ce->ce_flags = create_ce_flags(0);
> + tree_ce->ce_namelen = len;
> + oidcpy(&tree_ce->oid, &src[0]->oid);
> + memcpy(tree_ce->name, src[0]->name, len + 1);
> +
> + for (d = 1; d <= nr_names; d++)
> + src[d] = tree_ce;
> +
> + rc = call_unpack_fn((const struct cache_entry * const *)src, o);I don't fully understand why this is still necessary since "we detect that all trees are the same as cache-tree at this path." I do know (because I tried it :)) that if we don't actually call the unpack function the patch fails a bunch of tests so clearly something important is being missed.
Show 40 quoted lines
> + free(tree_ce);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + return rc;
> +
> + mark_ce_used(src[0], o);
> + }
> + if (o->debug_unpack)
> + printf("Unpacked %d entries from %s to %s using cache-tree\n",
> + nr_entries,
> + o->src_index->cache[pos]->name,
> + o->src_index->cache[pos + nr_entries - 1]->name);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int traverse_trees_recursive(int n, unsigned long dirmask,
> unsigned long df_conflicts,
> struct name_entry *names,
> @@ -655,6 +751,27 @@ static int traverse_trees_recursive(int n, unsigned long dirmask,
> void *buf[MAX_UNPACK_TREES];
> struct traverse_info newinfo;
> struct name_entry *p;
> + int nr_entries;
> +
> + nr_entries = all_trees_same_as_cache_tree(n, dirmask, names, info);
> + if (nr_entries > 0) {
> + struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data;
> + int pos = index_pos_by_traverse_info(names, info);
> +
> + if (!o->merge || df_conflicts)
> + BUG("Wrong condition to get here buddy");
> +
> + /*
> + * All entries up to 'pos' must have been processed
> + * (i.e. marked CE_UNPACKED) at this point. But to be safe,
> + * save and restore cache_bottom anyway to not miss
> + * unprocessed entries before 'pos'.
> + */
> + bottom = o->cache_bottom;
> + ret = traverse_by_cache_tree(pos, nr_entries, n, names, info);
> + o->cache_bottom = bottom;I agree with adding this back in - very low cost to provide some consistency and additional safety.
Show 30 quoted lines
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> p = names;
> while (!p->mode)
> @@ -814,6 +931,11 @@ static struct cache_entry *create_ce_entry(const struct traverse_info *info, con
> return ce;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Note that traverse_by_cache_tree() duplicates some logic in this function
> + * without actually calling it. If you change the logic here you may need to
> + * check and change there as well.
> + */
> static int unpack_nondirectories(int n, unsigned long mask,
> unsigned long dirmask,
> struct cache_entry **src,
> @@ -998,6 +1120,11 @@ static void debug_unpack_callback(int n,
> debug_name_entry(i, names + i);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Note that traverse_by_cache_tree() duplicates some logic in this function
> + * without actually calling it. If you change the logic here you may need to
> + * check and change there as well.
> + */
> static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, struct name_entry *names, struct traverse_info *info)
> {
> struct cache_entry *src[MAX_UNPACK_TREES + 1] = { NULL, };
>