gpt4 book ai didi

c++ - 多线程强调内存碎片吗?

转载 作者:IT老高 更新时间:2023-10-28 12:31:21 29 4
gpt4 key购买 nike

说明

当使用 openmp 的 parallel for 构造分配和释放具有 4 个或更多线程的随机大小的内存块时,程序似乎在 test-program's 的后半部分开始泄漏大量内存。运行。因此,它将消耗的内存从 1050 MB 增加到 1500 MB 或更多,而不会实际使用额外的内存。

由于 valgrind 没有显示任何问题,我必须假设看似内存泄漏实际上是内存碎片的突出影响。

有趣的是,如果 2 个线程每个进行 10000 次分配,效果还没有显示,但如果 4 个线程每个进行 5000 次分配,效果就会很明显。此外,如果分配的 block 的最大大小减少到 256kb(从 1mb),效果会变弱。

重并发可以那么强调碎片化吗?还是这更有可能是堆中的错误?

测试程序说明

构建演示程序以从堆中获取总共 256 MB 随机大小的内存块,执行 5000 次分配。如果达到内存限制,首先分配的 block 将被释放,直到内存消耗低于限制。一旦执行了 5000 次分配,所有内存都会被释放并且循环结束。所有这些工作都是针对 openmp 生成的每个线程完成的。

这种内存分配方案允许我们预计每个线程的内存消耗约为 260 MB(包括一些簿记数据)。

演示程序

由于这确实是您可能想要测试的东西,您可以从 dropbox 下载带有简单 makefile 的示例程序。 .

按原样运行程序时,您应该至少有 1400 MB 的可用 RAM。随意调整代码中的常量以满足您的需要。

为了完整起见,实际代码如下:

#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <deque>

#include <omp.h>
#include <math.h>

typedef unsigned long long uint64_t;

void runParallelAllocTest()
{
// constants
const int NUM_ALLOCATIONS = 5000; // alloc's per thread
const int NUM_THREADS = 4; // how many threads?
const int NUM_ITERS = NUM_THREADS;// how many overall repetions

const bool USE_NEW = true; // use new or malloc? , seems to make no difference (as it should)
const bool DEBUG_ALLOCS = false; // debug output

// pre store allocation sizes
const int NUM_PRE_ALLOCS = 20000;
const uint64_t MEM_LIMIT = (1024 * 1024) * 256; // x MB per process
const size_t MAX_CHUNK_SIZE = 1024 * 1024 * 1;

srand(1);
std::vector<size_t> allocations;
allocations.resize(NUM_PRE_ALLOCS);
for (int i = 0; i < NUM_PRE_ALLOCS; i++) {
allocations[i] = rand() % MAX_CHUNK_SIZE; // use up to x MB chunks
}


#pragma omp parallel num_threads(NUM_THREADS)
#pragma omp for
for (int i = 0; i < NUM_ITERS; ++i) {
uint64_t long totalAllocBytes = 0;
uint64_t currAllocBytes = 0;

std::deque< std::pair<char*, uint64_t> > pointers;
const int myId = omp_get_thread_num();

for (int j = 0; j < NUM_ALLOCATIONS; ++j) {
// new allocation
const size_t allocSize = allocations[(myId * 100 + j) % NUM_PRE_ALLOCS ];

char* pnt = NULL;
if (USE_NEW) {
pnt = new char[allocSize];
} else {
pnt = (char*) malloc(allocSize);
}
pointers.push_back(std::make_pair(pnt, allocSize));

totalAllocBytes += allocSize;
currAllocBytes += allocSize;

// fill with values to add "delay"
for (int fill = 0; fill < (int) allocSize; ++fill) {
pnt[fill] = (char)(j % 255);
}


if (DEBUG_ALLOCS) {
std::cout << "Id " << myId << " New alloc " << pointers.size() << ", bytes:" << allocSize << " at " << (uint64_t) pnt << "\n";
}

// free all or just a bit
if (((j % 5) == 0) || (j == (NUM_ALLOCATIONS - 1))) {
int frees = 0;

// keep this much allocated
// last check, free all
uint64_t memLimit = MEM_LIMIT;
if (j == NUM_ALLOCATIONS - 1) {
std::cout << "Id " << myId << " about to release all memory: " << (currAllocBytes / (double)(1024 * 1024)) << " MB" << std::endl;
memLimit = 0;
}
//MEM_LIMIT = 0; // DEBUG

while (pointers.size() > 0 && (currAllocBytes > memLimit)) {
// free one of the first entries to allow previously obtained resources to 'live' longer
currAllocBytes -= pointers.front().second;
char* pnt = pointers.front().first;

// free memory
if (USE_NEW) {
delete[] pnt;
} else {
free(pnt);
}

// update array
pointers.pop_front();

if (DEBUG_ALLOCS) {
std::cout << "Id " << myId << " Free'd " << pointers.size() << " at " << (uint64_t) pnt << "\n";
}
frees++;
}
if (DEBUG_ALLOCS) {
std::cout << "Frees " << frees << ", " << currAllocBytes << "/" << MEM_LIMIT << ", " << totalAllocBytes << "\n";
}
}
} // for each allocation

if (currAllocBytes != 0) {
std::cerr << "Not all free'd!\n";
}

std::cout << "Id " << myId << " done, total alloc'ed " << ((double) totalAllocBytes / (double)(1024 * 1024)) << "MB \n";
} // for each iteration

exit(1);
}

int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
runParallelAllocTest();

return 0;
}

测试系统

就我目前所见,硬件非常重要。如果在更快的机器上运行,测试可能需要调整。

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     T7300  @ 2.00GHz
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS 64 bit
gcc 4.3, 4.4, 4.6
3988.62 Bogomips

测试

一旦你执行了makefile,你应该得到一个名为ompmemtest的文件。为了查询一段时间内的内存使用情况,我使用了以下命令:

./ompmemtest &
top -b | grep ompmemtest

这会产生令人印象深刻的碎片或泄漏行为。 4 个线程的预期内存消耗为 1090 MB,随着时间的推移变为 1500 MB:

PID   USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
11626 byron 20 0 204m 99m 1000 R 27 2.5 0:00.81 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 992m 832m 1004 R 195 21.0 0:06.69 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1118m 1.0g 1004 R 189 26.1 0:12.40 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1218m 1.0g 1004 R 190 27.1 0:18.13 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1282m 1.1g 1004 R 195 29.6 0:24.06 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1471m 1.3g 1004 R 195 33.5 0:29.96 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1469m 1.3g 1004 R 194 33.5 0:35.85 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1469m 1.3g 1004 R 195 33.6 0:41.75 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1636m 1.5g 1004 R 194 37.8 0:47.62 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1660m 1.5g 1004 R 195 38.0 0:53.54 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1669m 1.5g 1004 R 195 38.2 0:59.45 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1664m 1.5g 1004 R 194 38.1 1:05.32 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1724m 1.5g 1004 R 195 40.0 1:11.21 ompmemtest
11626 byron 20 0 1724m 1.6g 1140 S 193 40.1 1:17.07 ompmemtest

请注意:我可以在使用 gcc 4.3、4.4 和 4.6(trunk) 进行编译时重现此问题。

最佳答案

好的,上钩了。

这是在带有

的系统上
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU    Q9550  @ 2.83GHz
4x5666.59 bogomips

Linux meerkat 2.6.35-28-generic-pae #50-Ubuntu SMP Fri Mar 18 20:43:15 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux

gcc version 4.4.5

total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 8127172 4220560 3906612 0 374328 2748796
-/+ buffers/cache: 1097436 7029736
Swap: 0 0 0

天真的运行

我刚刚运行了它

time ./ompmemtest 
Id 0 about to release all memory: 258.144 MB
Id 0 done, total alloc'ed -1572.7MB
Id 3 about to release all memory: 257.854 MB
Id 3 done, total alloc'ed -1569.6MB
Id 1 about to release all memory: 257.339 MB
Id 2 about to release all memory: 257.043 MB
Id 1 done, total alloc'ed -1570.42MB
Id 2 done, total alloc'ed -1569.96MB

real 0m13.429s
user 0m44.619s
sys 0m6.000s

没什么了不起的。这是 vmstat -S M 1

的同时输出

Vmstat 原始数据

procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
0 0 0 3892 364 2669 0 0 24 0 701 1487 2 1 97 0
4 0 0 3421 364 2669 0 0 0 0 1317 1953 53 7 40 0
4 0 0 2858 364 2669 0 0 0 0 2715 5030 79 16 5 0
4 0 0 2861 364 2669 0 0 0 0 6164 12637 76 15 9 0
4 0 0 2853 364 2669 0 0 0 0 4845 8617 77 13 10 0
4 0 0 2848 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3782 7084 79 13 8 0
5 0 0 2842 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3723 6120 81 12 7 0
4 0 0 2835 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3477 4943 84 9 7 0
4 0 0 2834 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3273 4950 81 10 9 0
5 0 0 2828 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3226 4812 84 11 6 0
4 0 0 2823 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3250 4889 83 10 7 0
4 0 0 2826 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3023 4353 85 10 6 0
4 0 0 2817 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3176 4284 83 10 7 0
4 0 0 2823 364 2669 0 0 0 0 3008 4063 84 10 6 0
0 0 0 3893 364 2669 0 0 0 0 4023 4228 64 10 26 0

这些信息对你有什么意义吗?

Google Thread Caching Malloc

现在为了真正的乐趣,添加一点香料

time LD_PRELOAD="/usr/lib/libtcmalloc.so" ./ompmemtest 
Id 1 about to release all memory: 257.339 MB
Id 1 done, total alloc'ed -1570.42MB
Id 3 about to release all memory: 257.854 MB
Id 3 done, total alloc'ed -1569.6MB
Id 2 about to release all memory: 257.043 MB
Id 2 done, total alloc'ed -1569.96MB
Id 0 about to release all memory: 258.144 MB
Id 0 done, total alloc'ed -1572.7MB

real 0m11.663s
user 0m44.255s
sys 0m1.028s

看起来更快,不是吗?

procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
4 0 0 3562 364 2684 0 0 0 0 1041 1676 28 7 64 0
4 2 0 2806 364 2684 0 0 0 172 1641 1843 84 14 1 0
4 0 0 2758 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1520 1009 98 2 1 0
4 0 0 2747 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1504 859 98 2 0 0
5 0 0 2745 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1575 1073 98 2 0 0
5 0 0 2739 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1415 743 99 1 0 0
4 0 0 2738 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1526 981 99 2 0 0
4 0 0 2731 364 2685 0 0 0 684 1536 927 98 2 0 0
4 0 0 2730 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1584 1010 99 1 0 0
5 0 0 2730 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1461 917 99 2 0 0
4 0 0 2729 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1561 1036 99 1 0 0
4 0 0 2729 364 2685 0 0 0 0 1406 756 100 1 0 0
0 0 0 3819 364 2685 0 0 0 4 1159 1476 26 3 71 0

如果您想比较 vmstat 输出

Valgrind --tool massif

这是 valgrind --tool=massif ./ompmemtest(默认 malloc)之后 ms_print 的输出头:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Command: ./ompmemtest
Massif arguments: (none)
ms_print arguments: massif.out.beforetcmalloc
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


GB
1.009^ :
| ##::::@@:::::::@@::::::@@::::@@::@::::@::::@:::::::::@::::::@:::
| # :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@:::
| # :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@:::
| :# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@:::
| :# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@:::
| :# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| : ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| : ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| :: ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| :: ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::: ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::: ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
| ::: ::# :: :@ :::: ::@ : ::::@ :: :@ ::@::::@: ::@:::::: ::@::::::@::::
0 +----------------------------------------------------------------------->Gi
0 264.0

Number of snapshots: 63
Detailed snapshots: [6 (peak), 10, 17, 23, 27, 30, 35, 39, 48, 56]

Google HEAPPPROFILE

不幸的是,原版 valgrind 不适用于 tcmalloc,所以我换了马中赛to heap profiling with google-perftools

gcc openMpMemtest_Linux.cpp -fopenmp -lgomp -lstdc++ -ltcmalloc -o ompmemtest

time HEAPPROFILE=/tmp/heapprofile ./ompmemtest
Starting tracking the heap
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0001.heap (100 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0002.heap (200 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0003.heap (300 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0004.heap (400 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0005.heap (501 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0006.heap (601 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0007.heap (701 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0008.heap (801 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0009.heap (902 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0010.heap (1002 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0011.heap (2029 MB allocated cumulatively, 1031 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0012.heap (3053 MB allocated cumulatively, 1030 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0013.heap (4078 MB allocated cumulatively, 1031 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0014.heap (5102 MB allocated cumulatively, 1031 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0015.heap (6126 MB allocated cumulatively, 1033 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0016.heap (7151 MB allocated cumulatively, 1029 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0017.heap (8175 MB allocated cumulatively, 1029 MB currently in use)
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0018.heap (9199 MB allocated cumulatively, 1028 MB currently in use)
Id 0 about to release all memory: 258.144 MB
Id 0 done, total alloc'ed -1572.7MB
Id 2 about to release all memory: 257.043 MB
Id 2 done, total alloc'ed -1569.96MB
Id 3 about to release all memory: 257.854 MB
Id 3 done, total alloc'ed -1569.6MB
Id 1 about to release all memory: 257.339 MB
Id 1 done, total alloc'ed -1570.42MB
Dumping heap profile to /tmp/heapprofile.0019.heap (Exiting)

real 0m11.981s
user 0m44.455s
sys 0m1.124s

联系我获取完整日志/详细信息

更新

致评论:我更新了程序

--- omptest/openMpMemtest_Linux.cpp 2011-05-03 23:18:44.000000000 +0200
+++ q/openMpMemtest_Linux.cpp 2011-05-04 13:42:47.371726000 +0200
@@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
void runParallelAllocTest()
{
// constants
- const int NUM_ALLOCATIONS = 5000; // alloc's per thread
- const int NUM_THREADS = 4; // how many threads?
+ const int NUM_ALLOCATIONS = 55000; // alloc's per thread
+ const int NUM_THREADS = 8; // how many threads?
const int NUM_ITERS = NUM_THREADS;// how many overall repetions

const bool USE_NEW = true; // use new or malloc? , seems to make no difference (as it should)

它运行了超过 5 立方米。接近尾声,一张 htop 的截图告诉我们,保留集确实略高,接近 2.3g:

  1  [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||96.7%]     Tasks: 125 total, 2 running
2 [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||96.7%] Load average: 8.09 5.24 2.37
3 [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||97.4%] Uptime: 01:54:22
4 [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||96.1%]
Mem[||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 3055/7936MB]
Swp[ 0/0MB]

PID USER NLWP PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command
4330 sehe 8 20 0 2635M 2286M 908 R 368. 28.8 15:35.01 ./ompmemtest

与 tcmalloc 运行比较结果:4m12s, 相似的 top stats 有细微差别;最大的区别在于 VIRT 集(但这并不是特别有用,除非每个进程的地址空间非常有限?)。如果你问我,RES 集非常相似。 需要注意的更重要的一点是增加了并行度;现在所有核心都已用尽。这显然是由于使用 tcmalloc 时减少了对堆操作的锁定需求:

If the free list is empty: (1) We fetch a bunch of objects from a central free list for this size-class (the central free list is shared by all threads). (2) Place them in the thread-local free list. (3) Return one of the newly fetched objects to the applications.

  1  [|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%]     Tasks: 172 total, 2 running
2 [|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%] Load average: 7.39 2.92 1.11
3 [|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%] Uptime: 11:12:25
4 [|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%]
Mem[|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 3278/7936MB]
Swp[ 0/0MB]

PID USER NLWP PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command
14391 sehe 8 20 0 2251M 2179M 1148 R 379. 27.5 8:08.92 ./ompmemtest

关于c++ - 多线程强调内存碎片吗?,我们在Stack Overflow上找到一个类似的问题: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5875989/

29 4 0
Copyright 2021 - 2024 cfsdn All Rights Reserved 蜀ICP备2022000587号
广告合作:1813099741@qq.com 6ren.com