Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc #3873

lukas-w · 2017-10-10T19:25:04Z

Fixes #3865, by integrating rpmalloc.

Quick – probably not very meaningful – benchmark, using Skiessi-RandomProjectNumber14253:

	time user	time system	elapsed	cpu
stable-1.2	23.26	1.33	8.09	303%
malloc/free in MemoryManager	21.30	1.30	6.57	344%
rpmalloc override, replaces all memory allocations	21.66	1.45	6.47	357%
rpmalloc (this PR)	21.15	1.45	6.71	337%

Fixes #3865

zonkmachine · 2017-10-10T20:32:12Z

Cool!

On Linuxmint 17.3, I get:

-- Configuring done
CMake Error at src/3rdparty/rpmalloc/CMakeLists.txt:3 (add_library):
  Cannot find source file:

.

Edit. New to submodules. The commands that got me going was:

git submodule init
git submodule update --recursive --remote

tresf · 2017-10-10T20:46:04Z

On Linuxmint 17.3, I get:

It's a submodule, you'll have to clone with the recurse option. git clone --recursive foo://bar

Umcaruje · 2017-10-10T20:48:30Z

Error when compiling with carla:

In file included from /home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp:25:0:
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.h:81:5: error: ‘QMutex’ does not name a type
     QMutex fMutex;
     ^
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp: In member function ‘intptr_t CarlaInstrument::handleDispatcher(NativeHostDispatcherOpcode, int32_t, intptr_t, void*, float)’:
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp:253:12: warning: enumeration value ‘NATIVE_HOST_OPCODE_INTERNAL_PLUGIN’ not handled in switch [-Wswitch]
     switch (opcode)
            ^
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp: In member function ‘virtual void CarlaInstrument::play(sample_t (*)[2])’:
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp:355:32: error: ‘fMutex’ was not declared in this scope
         const QMutexLocker ml(&fMutex);
                                ^
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp: In member function ‘virtual bool CarlaInstrument::handleMidiEvent(const MidiEvent&, const MidiTime&, f_cnt_t)’:
/home/umcaruje/github/lmmstest/plugins/carlabase/carla.cpp:371:28: error: ‘fMutex’ was not declared in this scope
     const QMutexLocker ml(&fMutex);
                            ^
plugins/carlabase/CMakeFiles/carlabase.dir/build.make:72: recipe for target 'plugins/carlabase/CMakeFiles/carlabase.dir/carla.cpp.o' failed
make[2]: *** [plugins/carlabase/CMakeFiles/carlabase.dir/carla.cpp.o] Error 1

tresf · 2017-10-10T20:55:20Z

@Umcaruje that appears to be a bug with Carla, it should have imported QMutex without relying on it from another header. Can you add #include <QMutex> to the Carla plugin, it sounds like an existing (benign with MemoryManager, but still legit) bug with Carla on stable although @lukas-w can just add it to the PR too. :)

This is easy to miss when another common header accidentally provides the include.

Umcaruje · 2017-10-10T21:22:24Z

Built without carla, I can confirm I don't get stutters while playing on elementary os loki under both qt4 and qt5. Very good and comparable performance with 1.1. I'll keep using it for further testing.

PhysSong · 2017-10-11T05:03:59Z

Tested. It showed very fast allocation speed and I got no crashes during tests.

mjansson · 2017-10-11T07:50:48Z

src/core/MemoryManager.cpp

-		MemoryHelper::alignedFree( ( *it ).m_pool );
-		MemoryHelper::alignedFree( ( *it ).m_free );
+	if (--thread_guard_depth == 0) {
+		rpmalloc_thread_initialize();


You probably meant to do rpmalloc_thread_finalize here

Absolutely. Thanks!

See https://github.com/rampantpixels/rpmalloc/issues/30

gi0e5b06 · 2017-10-11T12:26:55Z

May someone try this project?
It runs at 60% CPU on my old computer.
memory20171011.zip

qnebra · 2017-10-11T14:05:02Z

@gi0e5b06

On my computer with 2.2 Ghz CPU LMMS with your project opened use 14% of CPU.

qnebra · 2017-10-11T14:38:24Z

I am merged this PR into my local lmms and got this on cmake generate:

CMake Error at src/3rdparty/rpmalloc/CMakeLists.txt:3 (add_library):
Cannot find source file:

rpmalloc/rpmalloc/rpmalloc.c

Tried extensions .c .C .c++ .cc .cpp .cxx .m .M .mm .h .hh .h++ .hm .hpp
.hxx .in .txx

CMake Error: Cannot determine link language for target "rpmalloc".
CMake Error: CMake can not determine linker language for target: rpmalloc

tresf · 2017-10-11T14:43:05Z

@qnebra please see #3873 (comment). This PR switches the project to using submodules, which will take some adjustment, but will greatly reduce the amount of 3rd party source code we bundle.

qnebra · 2017-10-11T14:55:08Z

Thank you.
Maybe add information about submodules to a developer wiki of lmms? To avoid situations like this.

zonkmachine · 2017-10-11T14:56:04Z

Maybe add information about submodules to a developer wiki of lmms?

Let's merge it first.

qnebra · 2017-10-11T14:57:35Z

Test & merge, of course.

gi0e5b06 · 2017-10-12T07:26:07Z

@qnebra Thanks for testing. I'm making some tests about memory use. Actually half of the instruments are good (don't allocate extra memory) and the other half is not, mainly because of Oscillator. All oscillators are duplicated for each played note (with no new information). There must be a way to avoid that.

PS1: I also rewrote BaseDetuning to avoid allocation. @softrabbit was right, a single float works fine.

PS2: This memory manager doesn't seem to improve performance a lot. I wouldn't merge it as it is. The memory manager is a sensible part very depending on the OS, the OS version, the compiler, etc. It should be configurable at runtime. Right now, 5 are available (legacy, standard, rpmalloc, mine and PsySong's one). An abstract class would make wonders.

softrabbit · 2017-10-12T08:20:03Z

All oscillators are duplicated for each played note (with no new information). There must be a way to avoid that.

What, no new information? Frequency and phase come to mind... that being said, I'd like to see some kind of "oscillator bank" concept, where all 6 (TripleO) or 18 (Organic) Oscillators are merged into one object, preferably organizing the data and math in a way that makes it easy for compilers to optimize. (SIMD, anyone?) That might even up for some new features...

gi0e5b06 · 2017-10-12T09:33:18Z

@softrabbit Frequency is the same than for the NotePlayHandle, same for ext_phaseOffset. PhaseOffset seems to be more or less equal to ext_phaseOffset. So only phase stays (one float), which is probably computable (I think but I may be wrong). Anyway, there is a big room for improvment here. Especially as Oscillator by many many instruments.

I wouldn't group the oscillators into a single object. Instead I would pre-allocate 2048 oscillators (for example) and reuse them when needed because all the instruments use the same Oscillator type (for now). More important, if it goes over 2048, the note should be skipped.

As a result: no memory allocation and CPU under controlled for all the instruments.

softrabbit · 2017-10-12T10:15:37Z

I wouldn't group the oscillators into a single object. Instead I would pre-allocate 2048 oscillators (for example) and reuse them when needed because all the instruments use the same Oscillator type (for now). More important, if it goes over 2048, the note should be skipped.

I hate to dig up my own code as an example, but: #2089

That's a speedup of maybe ~2x from reorganizing arrays of structs into structs of arrays. Probably even more if compiling for wider SIMD models than SSE2. That's not to say the same applies to the Oscillator situation, but it might be worth considering.

gi0e5b06 · 2017-10-12T11:14:55Z

@softrabbit Actually I don't disagree. But that was my understanding that you talked about grouping, not restructurating. As a first step requiring little code changes, I'm suggesting to group them all in a big array (with eventually informal subgrouping in 6/18).

As for switching from "arrays of structs into structs of arrays", there are certainly possible gains. But it is a complete rewrite of the Oscillator class and of the depending instruments. And IMHO, that's something that should be only tried later. Eventually in parallel (new classes: Oscillators, Kicker2, TripleOscillator2, Organic2, etc).

qnebra · 2017-10-12T11:56:42Z

@gi0e5b06

I forgot about something, on my PC your project run "as is" consume 65% of CPU. My previous tests are incorrect, because I modified your project. Interesing behaviour with this loop points.

What tools can I use to test lmms perfomance? Because in my project program has low usage of system resources according to system monitoring tools, but sounds are extremely stutter and glitch.

PhysSong · 2017-10-14T02:15:31Z

Are there some benchmarks for cache miss rate? It is also important for performance.

lukas-w · 2017-10-18T15:01:32Z

@PhysSong I did a couple more benchmarks, again using Skiessi-RandomProjectNumber14253.

Startup and load project:

	time	cpu	Ir incl.	L1 Miss Sum	Cycle Estimation	Called
stable-1.2	2.06	45%	1.6×10⁹ (27.9%)	3.0×10⁶ (3.79%)	1.7×10⁹ (23.74%)	6.6×10³
this PR	1.97	44%	4.7×10⁵ (0.01%)	5.8×10³ (0.01%)	1.7×10⁴ (0.00%)	6.6×10³

Render project using CLI:

	time	cpu	Ir incl.	L1 Miss Sum	Cycle Estimation	Called
stable-1.2	07.49	324%	2.0×10¹⁰ (15.3%)	3.9×10⁴ (7.27%)	2.0×10¹⁰ (14.9%)	2.8×10⁴
this PR	06.30	359%	2.2×10⁶ (0.00%)	7.2×10³ (0.00%)	5.5×10⁵ (0.00%)	2.8×10⁴

If KCachegrind's cycle estimation is accurate, the old MemoryManager is something between 36,000 (rendering) and 100,000 times (startup and loading) slower than rpmalloc.

Merging.

zonkmachine · 2017-10-20T17:14:24Z

Maybe add information about submodules to a developer wiki of lmms?

@qnebra You are of course absolutely right here. The now updated wiki page is:
https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/wiki/Accessing-git-repository

gi0e5b06 · 2017-10-20T18:31:11Z

My memory manager is about 35% faster than rpmalloc.
And it's not even optimized yet.
Available here:
https://github.com/gi0e5b06/lmms/blob/master/src/core/MemoryManagerArray.cpp

Drawbacks: is dedicated to LMMS, uses on average more memory

To do: auta-adaptable to the style of the user

Suggestion: make the memory manager an option configurable by the user

This reverts commit 8d6cb12.

* Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc Fixes LMMS#3865 * Travis: Specify OSX image for Qt5 build

lukas-w added 3 commits October 10, 2017 19:33

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc

6f24474

Fixes #3865

rpmalloc: Explicitly specify C11 mode

17b4178

Fix rpmalloc compile flags, fix missing includes

14cde39

mjansson reviewed Oct 11, 2017

View reviewed changes

lukas-w added 5 commits October 11, 2017 09:55

rpmalloc: Use develop branch for MinGW fix

7f5bc19

See https://github.com/rampantpixels/rpmalloc/issues/30

Fix rpmalloc thread guard destructor

3ae8889

Carla: Add missing include

f7ed3fc

rpmalloc: Actually update to latest develop

743a05e

Travis: Specify OSX image for Qt5 build

5ae1026

mjansson mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2017

EINVAL undeclared on MINGW mjansson/rpmalloc#30

Closed

lukas-w mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2017

Use weak loading of libjack #3887

Merged

lukas-w merged commit 8d6cb12 into stable-1.2 Oct 18, 2017

lukas-w deleted the fix/memory-manager-performance branch October 18, 2017 15:02

PhysSong added a commit to PhysSong/lmms that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2017

Revert "Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc (LMMS#3873)"

073b437

This reverts commit 8d6cb12.

PhysSong mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2017

Add all the Qt5 Linux VST implementations #3786

Merged

lukas-w mentioned this pull request Oct 27, 2017

LMMS doesn't free memory #3366

Closed

PhysSong pushed a commit to PhysSong/lmms that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2017

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc (LMMS#3873)

158cf1a

* Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc Fixes LMMS#3865 * Travis: Specify OSX image for Qt5 build

PhysSong pushed a commit to PhysSong/lmms that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2017

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc (LMMS#3873)

83b7034

* Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc Fixes LMMS#3865 * Travis: Specify OSX image for Qt5 build

tresf mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2017

Submodule candidates #3963

Closed

lukas-w mentioned this pull request Jan 7, 2018

Reduce allocations to improve performance. #3868

Closed

sdasda7777 pushed a commit to sdasda7777/lmms that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2022

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc (LMMS#3873)

e07c3b2

* Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc Fixes LMMS#3865 * Travis: Specify OSX image for Qt5 build

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc #3873

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc #3873

lukas-w commented Oct 10, 2017

zonkmachine commented Oct 10, 2017 •

edited

Loading

tresf commented Oct 10, 2017

Umcaruje commented Oct 10, 2017

tresf commented Oct 10, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Umcaruje commented Oct 10, 2017

PhysSong commented Oct 11, 2017

mjansson Oct 11, 2017

lukas-w Oct 11, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

tresf commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

zonkmachine commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

softrabbit commented Oct 12, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017

softrabbit commented Oct 12, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

PhysSong commented Oct 14, 2017

lukas-w commented Oct 18, 2017 •

edited

Loading

zonkmachine commented Oct 20, 2017 •

edited

Loading

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 20, 2017

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc #3873

Replace MemoryManager implementation with rpmalloc #3873

Conversation

lukas-w commented Oct 10, 2017

zonkmachine commented Oct 10, 2017 • edited Loading

tresf commented Oct 10, 2017

Umcaruje commented Oct 10, 2017

tresf commented Oct 10, 2017 • edited Loading

Umcaruje commented Oct 10, 2017

PhysSong commented Oct 11, 2017

mjansson Oct 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lukas-w Oct 11, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

tresf commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

zonkmachine commented Oct 11, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 11, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017 • edited Loading

softrabbit commented Oct 12, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017

softrabbit commented Oct 12, 2017

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017

qnebra commented Oct 12, 2017 • edited Loading

PhysSong commented Oct 14, 2017

lukas-w commented Oct 18, 2017 • edited Loading

zonkmachine commented Oct 20, 2017 • edited Loading

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 20, 2017

zonkmachine commented Oct 10, 2017 •

edited

Loading

tresf commented Oct 10, 2017 •

edited

Loading

gi0e5b06 commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

qnebra commented Oct 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lukas-w commented Oct 18, 2017 •

edited

Loading

zonkmachine commented Oct 20, 2017 •

edited

Loading