| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1210756974.3177.113.camel@ymzhang>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 17:22:53 +0800
From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Aneesh Kumar KV <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: volanoMark regression with kernel 2.6.26-rc1
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 11:20 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 11:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 13:02 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> >
> > > A quick update:
> > > With 2.6.26-rc2 (CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y), volanoMark result on my 8-core stoakley
> > > is about 10% worse than the one of 2.6.26-rc1.
> >
> > Here (Q6600), 2.6.26-rc2 CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y regression culprit for
> > volanomark is the same one identified for mysql+oltp.
> >
> > (i have yet to figure out where the buglet lies, but there is definitely
> > one in there somewhere)
> >
> Yeah, I expect that when you create some groups and move everything down
> 1 level you'll get into the same problems as with user grouping.
>
> The thing seems to be that rq weights shrink to < 1 task level in these
> situations - because its spreading 1 tasks (well group) worth of load
> over the various CPUs.
>
> We're going through the load balance code atm to find out where the
> small load numbers would affect decisions.
>
> It looks like things like find_busiest_group() just think everything is
> peachy when the imbalance is < 1 task - which with all this grouping
> stuff is not necessarily true.
In case I might mislead you on the find_busiest_group path, I did more testing
and collected data on both hackbench and volanoMark.
I reran hackbench against 2.6.25, 2.6.26-rc2 and 2.6.26-rc2+slub_reverse, because
2.6.26-rc includes Christoph's handling multi page-size slub patch which could improve
hackbench. The testing machine is 8-core stoakley.
All kernel are compiled with options:
CONFIG_LOG_BUF_SHIFT=17
# CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set
CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK=y
CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED=y
CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED=y
# CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED is not set
CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y
# CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED is not set
CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED=y
| hackbench 100 process 2000 | hackbench 100 process 10000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.6.25 | 35seconds | 182second
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.6.26-rc2 | 28.5seconds | 140second
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.6.26-rc2 | |
+reverse_slub | 32seconds | 160second
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So if we don't consider SLUB patch improvement, 2.6.26-rc2 still has some improvement
on hackbench. Not sure if the improvement is related to scheduler.
Then, I collected the schedule caller information with volanoMark testing. Data
is collected for 20 seconds during the testing.
Below is the gprof output with kernel 2.6.25 using above config option.
0.00 0.00 2962/19804016 retint_careful [16339]
0.00 0.00 3234/19804016 sys_rt_sigsuspend [20024]
0.00 0.00 4960/19804016 lock_sock_nested [11240]
0.00 0.00 8957/19804016 sysret_careful [20253]
0.00 0.00 28507/19804016 cpu_idle [4340]
0.00 0.00 2137406/19804016 futex_wait [8065]
0.00 0.00 4400980/19804016 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 13213237/19804016 sys_sched_yield [20035]
[1] 0.0 0.00 0.00 19804016 schedule [1]
-----------------------------------------------
0.00 0.00 1/4400980 cifs_oplock_thread [3727]
0.00 0.00 2/4400980 cifs_dnotify_thread [3700]
0.00 0.00 2/4400980 inet_csk_accept [9461]
0.00 0.00 29/4400980 do_select [5468]
0.00 0.00 4400946/4400980 sk_wait_data [18983]
[2] 0.0 0.00 0.00 4400980 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 4400980/19804016 schedule [1]
Below is the gprof output with kernel 2.6.26-rc2 using above config option.
0.00 0.00 3035/12423442 sys_rt_sigsuspend [20387]
0.00 0.00 7862/12423442 lock_sock_nested [11424]
0.00 0.00 31105/12423442 __cond_resched [23242]
0.00 0.00 135653/12423442 retint_careful [16627]
0.00 0.00 180994/12423442 cpu_idle [4411]
0.00 0.00 506419/12423442 sysret_careful [20620]
0.00 0.00 1657696/12423442 futex_wait [8211]
0.00 0.00 3062197/12423442 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 6836914/12423442 sys_sched_yield [20398]
[1] 0.0 0.00 0.00 12423442 schedule [1]
-----------------------------------------------
0.00 0.00 1/3062197 cifs_dnotify_thread [3781]
0.00 0.00 2/3062197 sk_stream_wait_memory [19336]
0.00 0.00 29/3062197 do_select [5561]
0.00 0.00 3062165/3062197 sk_wait_data [19338]
[2] 0.0 0.00 0.00 3062197 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 3062197/12423442 schedule [1]
So with kernel 2.6.25, about 66% calling of schedule is from sys_sched_yield,
but only 55% calling of schedule is from sys_sched_yield with kernel 2.6.26-rc2.
sysret_careful/retint_careful times mean non-voluntary schedule times. 2.6.25's
non-voluntary schedule is far less than the one of 2.6.26-rc2.
Below is the gprof output with kernel 2.6.26-rc2(CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED=y,CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y).
0.00 0.00 2519/20999187 retint_careful [16704]
0.00 0.00 5899/20999187 lock_sock_nested [11494]
0.00 0.00 27059/20999187 sysret_careful [20697]
0.00 0.00 73569/20999187 cpu_idle [4473]
0.00 0.00 2360268/20999187 futex_wait [8275]
0.00 0.00 4755337/20999187 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 13769085/20999187 sys_sched_yield [20475]
[1] 0.0 0.00 0.00 20999187 schedule [1]
-----------------------------------------------
0.00 0.00 1/4755337 cifs_dnotify_thread [3837]
0.00 0.00 2/4755337 inet_csk_accept [9697]
0.00 0.00 31/4755337 do_select [5624]
0.00 0.00 4755303/4755337 sk_wait_data [19414]
[2] 0.0 0.00 0.00 4755337 schedule_timeout [2]
0.00 0.00 4755337/20999187 schedule [1]
-----------------------------------------------
volanoMark need /proc/sys/kernel/sched_compat_yield=1.
Perhaps above info might provide some clues? either 2.6.26-rc2 change has some impact on
sys_sched_yield?
yanmin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists