linux-kernel - RFC: Ideal Adaptive Spinning Conditions

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:21:48 -0700
From:	Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
To:	"lkml, " <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sdietrich@...ell.com>,
	Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: RFC: Ideal Adaptive Spinning Conditions

I'm looking at some adaptive spinning with futexes as a way to help 
reduce the dependence on sched_yield() to implement userspace spinlocks. 
Chris, I included you in the CC after reading your comments regarding 
sched_yield() at kernel summit and I thought you might be interested.

I have an experimental patchset that implements FUTEX_LOCK and 
FUTEX_LOCK_ADAPTIVE in the kernel and use something akin to 
mutex_spin_on_owner() for the first waiter to spin. What I'm finding is 
that adaptive spinning actually hurts my particular test case, so I was 
hoping to poll people for context regarding the existing adaptive 
spinning implementations in the kernel as to where we see benefit. Under 
which conditions does adaptive spinning help?

I presume locks with a short average hold time stand to gain the most as 
the longer the lock is held the more likely the spinner will expire its 
timeslice or that the scheduling gain becomes noise in the acquisition 
time. My test case simple calls "lock();unlock()" for a fixed number of 
iterations and reports the iterations per second at the end of the run. 
It can run with an arbitrary number of threads as well. I typically run 
with 256 threads for 10M iterations.

          futex_lock: Result: 635 Kiter/s
futex_lock_adaptive: Result: 542 Kiter/s

I've limited the number of spinners to 1 but feel that perhaps this 
should be configurable as locks with very short hold times could benefit 
from up to NR_CPUS-1 spinners.

I'd really appreciate any data, just general insight, you may have 
acquired while implementing adaptive spinning for rt-mutexes and 
mutexes. Open questions for me regarding conditions where adaptive 
spinning helps are:

o What type of lock hold times do we expect to benefit?
o How much contention is a good match for adaptive spinning?
   - this is related to the number of threads to run in the test
o How many spinners should be allowed?

I can share the kernel patches if people are interested, but they are 
really early, and I'm not sure they are of much value until I better 
understand the conditions where this is expected to be useful.

Thanks,

-- 
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team
--
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/