| 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: <20090322195205.GB15002@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:52:05 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] [GIT PULL] updates for tip/tracing/ftrace
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> >
> > ok, with Frederic we figured out the problem.
> >
> > What helped things most was this trace-dump output:
> >
> > 0) + 15.281 us | }
> > 0) | handle_irq() {
> > 1) + 35.871 us | }
> > 1) | timespec_to_ktime() {
> > 0) 4.608 us | }
> > 0) | generic_handle_irq_desc() {
> > 1) 4.097 us | }
> > 1) + 14.171 us | }
> > 0) 4.450 us | _spin_lock();
> > 1) + 60.127 us | }
> > 1) | ktime_get() {
> > 0) | ack_apic_edge() {
> > 1) | getnstimeofday() {
> > 0) 6.486 us | }
> > 0) 5.619 us | irq_complete_move();
> > 1) 5.158 us | jiffies_read();
> > 0) | move_native_irq() {
> > 1) + 15.495 us | }
> > 1) + 26.161 us | }
> > 0) 5.631 us | }
> > 1) 5.549 us | set_normalized_timespec();
> > 0) + 16.304 us | }
> > 0) | ack_APIC_irq() {
> > 1) + 48.377 us | }
> > 1) | timespec_to_ktime() {
> > 0) 5.762 us | native_apic_mem_write();
> > 1) 5.751 us | }
> > 0) + 16.162 us | }
> > 1) + 16.413 us | }
> > 0) + 27.185 us | }
> > 1) + 81.519 us | }
> > 0) + 80.245 us | }
> > 1) ! 154.606 us | }
> > 0) | _spin_unlock() {
> > 1) 5.743 us | tick_nohz_update_jiffies();
> > 0) 5.781 us | }
> > 1) ! 183.912 us | }
> > 0) 5.327 us | preempt_schedule();
> > 1) ! 202.575 us | }
> > 0) + 25.827 us | }
> >
> > [...]
> > 1) ! 2623.297 us | }
> >
> > i.e. all CPUs spend 2-3 milliseconds to handle a single tick. This
> > is on a Core2 Extreme Edition 2.93 GHz CPU, so this kind of cost was
> > unexpected.
> >
> > Until i saw this:
> >
> > CONFIG_TRACE_BRANCH_PROFILING=y
> > CONFIG_PROFILE_ALL_BRANCHES=y
> >
> > that explains it all. The above sequence is two CPUs 'lock stepped'
> > in a very high overhead series of cacheline ping-pongs. The
> > ping-pongs happen due to every branch in the kernel doing:
> >
> > ______f.miss_hit[______r]++;
> >
> > where the branch info metadata is defined as global variables:
> >
> > static struct ftrace_branch_data \
> > __attribute__((__aligned__(4))) \
> > __attribute__((section("_ftrace_branch"))) \
> >
> > not only is it global, it's also false cacheline-shared due to a 4
> > byte alignment.
> >
> > The proper solution would be to use percpu data and percpu_add()
> > primitives for this.
>
> Ug, that would increase the size tremendously. [...]
Yes, but not significantly more than we already do.
> [...] Remember, we have a data structure for ever if statement in
> the kernel. I can't recall how much memory it takes up now, but it
> was quite a bit. I can't imagine what it would be like to multiply
> that by NR_CPUS.
No, per CPU data are allocated per each possible CPU, not NR_CPUs.
Ingo
--
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