hakmem/docs/benchmarks/PERF_BASELINE_FRONT_DIRECT.md

Perf Baseline: Front-Direct Mode (Post-SEGV Fix)

Date: 2025-11-14 Commit: 696aa7c0b (SEGV fix with mincore() safety checks) Test: bench_random_mixed_hakmem 200000 4096 1234567 Mode: HAKMEM_TINY_FRONT_DIRECT=1

---

📊 Performance Summary

Throughput

HAKMEM (Front-Direct): 563K ops/s (0.355s for 200K iterations)
System malloc:         ~90M ops/s (estimated)
Gap:                   160x slower (0.63% of target)

Regression Alert: Phase 11 achieved 9.38M ops/s (before SEGV fix) Current: 563K ops/s → -94% regression (mincore() overhead)

---

🔥 Hotspot Analysis

Syscall Statistics (200K iterations)

Syscall	Count	Time (s)	% Time	Impact
munmap	3,214	0.0258	47.4%	❌ CRITICAL
mmap	3,241	0.0149	27.4%	❌ CRITICAL
madvise	1,591	0.0072	13.3%	⚠️ High
mincore	1,591	0.0060	11.0%	⚠️ High (SEGV fix overhead)
Other	143	0.0006	1.0%	✓ OK
Total	9,780	0.0544	100%

Key Findings:

1. mmap/munmap churn: 6,455 calls (74.8% of syscall time)

   • Root cause: SuperSlab aggressive deallocation
   • Expected: ~100-200 calls (mimalloc-style pooling)
   • Gap: 32-65x excessive syscalls

2. mincore() overhead: 1,591 calls (11.0% time)

   • Added by SEGV fix (commit 696aa7c0b)
   • Called on EVERY unknown pointer in free wrapper
   • Optimization needed: Cache result, skip for known patterns

---

📈 Hardware Performance Counters

Counter	Value	Notes
Cycles	826M
Instructions	847M
IPC	1.03	⚠️ Low (target: 2-4)
Branches	177M
Branch misses	12.1M	6.82% miss rate (✓ OK)
Cache refs	53.3M
Cache misses	8.7M	16.32% miss rate (⚠️ High)
Page faults	59,659	⚠️ High (0.30 per iteration)

Performance Issues:

1. Low IPC (1.03): Memory stalls dominating (cache misses, TLB pressure)
2. High cache miss rate (16.32%): Pointer chasing, poor locality
3. Page faults (59K): mmap/munmap churn causing TLB thrashing

---

🎯 Bottleneck Ranking (by Impact)

Box 1: SuperSlab/Shared Pool (CRITICAL - 74.8% syscall time)

Symptoms:

• mmap: 3,241 calls
• munmap: 3,214 calls
• madvise: 1,591 calls
• Total: 8,046 syscalls (82% of all syscalls)

Root Cause: Phase 9 Lazy Deallocation NOT working

• Hypothesis: LRU cache too small, prewarm insufficient
• Expected behavior: Reuse SuperSlabs, minimal syscalls
• Actual: Aggressive deallocation (mimalloc gap)

Attack Plan:

1. Immediate: Verify LRU cache is active
   • Check g_ss_lru_* counters
   • ENV: HAKMEM_SS_LRU_DEBUG=1
2. Phase 12 Design: Shared SuperSlab Pool (mimalloc-style)
   • 1 SuperSlab serves multiple size classes
   • Dynamic slab allocation
   • Target: 877 SuperSlabs → 100-200 (-70-80%)

Expected Impact: +1500% (74.8% → ~5%)

---

Box 2: mincore() Overhead (MODERATE - 11.0% syscall time)

Symptoms:

• mincore: 1,591 calls (11.0% time)
• Added by SEGV fix (commit 696aa7c0b)
• Called on EVERY external pointer in free wrapper

Root Cause: No caching, no fast-path for known patterns

Attack Plan:

1. Optimization A: Cache mincore() result per page
   • TLS cache: last_checked_page → is_mapped
   • Hit rate estimate: 90-95% (same page repeated)
2. Optimization B: Skip mincore() for known ranges
   • Check if ptr in expected range (heap, stack, mmap areas)
   • Use /proc/self/maps on init
3. Optimization C: Remove from classify_ptr()
   • Already done (Step 3 removed AllocHeader probe)
   • Only free wrapper needs it

Expected Impact: +12-15% (11.0% → ~1%)

---

Box 3: Front Cache Miss (LOW - visible in cache stats)

Symptoms:

• Cache miss rate: 16.32%
• IPC: 1.03 (low, memory-bound)

Attack Plan (after Box 1/2 fixed):

1. Check FastCache hit rate
   • ENV: HAKMEM_FRONT_STATS=1
   • Target: >90% hit rate
2. Tune FC capacity/refill size
   • ENV: HAKMEM_FC_CAP=256 (2x current)
   • ENV: HAKMEM_FC_REFILL=32 (2x current)

Expected Impact: +5-10% (after syscall fixes)

---

🚀 Optimization Priority

Phase A: SuperSlab Churn Fix (Target: +1500%)

# Step 1: Diagnose LRU
export HAKMEM_SS_LRU_DEBUG=1
export HAKMEM_SS_PREWARM_DEBUG=1
./bench_random_mixed_hakmem 200000 4096 1234567

# Step 2: Tune LRU size
export HAKMEM_SS_LRU_SIZE=128  # Current: unknown
export HAKMEM_SS_PREWARM=64    # Current: unknown

# Step 3: Design Phase 12 Shared Pool
# - Implement mimalloc-style dynamic slab allocation
# - Target: 6,455 syscalls → ~100 (-98%)

Phase B: mincore() Optimization (Target: +12-15%)

# Step 1: Page cache (TLS)
static __thread struct {
    void* page;
    int is_mapped;
} g_mincore_cache = {NULL, 0};

# Step 2: Fast-path check
if (page == g_mincore_cache.page) {
    is_mapped = g_mincore_cache.is_mapped;  // Cache hit
} else {
    is_mapped = mincore(...);  // Syscall
    g_mincore_cache.page = page;
    g_mincore_cache.is_mapped = is_mapped;
}

# Expected: 1,591 → ~100 calls (-94%)

Phase C: Front Tuning (Target: +5-10%)

# After Phase A/B complete
export HAKMEM_FC_CAP=256
export HAKMEM_FC_REFILL=32
export HAKMEM_FRONT_STATS=1

---

📋 Immediate Action Items

1. [ultrathink/ChatGPT] Review this report
2. [Task 1] Diagnose why Phase 9 LRU is not working
   • Run with HAKMEM_SS_LRU_DEBUG=1
   • Check LRU hit/miss counters
3. [Task 2] Design mincore() page cache
   • TLS cache (page → is_mapped)
   • Measure hit rate
4. [Task 3] Implement Phase 12 Shared SuperSlab Pool
   • Design doc: mimalloc-style dynamic allocation
   • Target: 877 → 100-200 SuperSlabs

---

🎯 Target Performance (After Optimizations)

Current:  563K ops/s
Target:   70-90M ops/s (System malloc: 90M)
Gap:      124-160x
Required: +12,400-15,900% improvement

Phase A (SuperSlab): +1500% →  8.5M ops/s (9.4% of target)
Phase B (mincore):   +15%   → 10.0M ops/s (11.1% of target)
Phase C (Front):     +10%   → 11.0M ops/s (12.2% of target)
Phase D (??):        Need more (+650-750%)

Note: Current performance is worse than Phase 11 (9.38M → 563K) Root cause: mincore() added in SEGV fix (1,591 syscalls) Priority: Fix mincore() overhead FIRST (Phase B), then SuperSlab (Phase A)