[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110614081315.GE29900@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 10:13:15 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
"Shi, Alex" <alex.shi@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: rcu: performance regression
* Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com> wrote:
> Commit a26ac2455ffcf3(rcu: move TREE_RCU from softirq to kthread)
> introduced performance regression. In our AIM7 test, this commit caused
> about 40% regression.
Sigh, this commit is somewhat of a train-wreck.
> The commit runs rcu callbacks in a kthread instead of softirq. We
> observed high rate of context switch which is caused by this. Out
> test system has 64 CPUs and HZ is 1000, so we saw more than 64k
> context switch per second which is caused by the rcu thread.
>
> I also did trace and found when rcy thread is woken up, most time
> the thread doesn't handle any callbacks actually, it just
> initializes new gp or end one gp or similar.
>
> From my understanding, the purpose to make rcu runs in kthread is
> to speed up rcu callbacks run (with help of rtmutex PI), not for
> end gp and so on, which runs pretty fast actually and doesn't need
> boost. To verify my findings, I had below debug patch applied. It
> still handles rcu callbacks in kthread if there is any pending
> callbacks, but other things are still running in softirq. this
> completely solved our regression. I thought this can still boost
> callbacks run. but I'm not expert in the area, so please help.
>
> Thanks,
> Shaohua
> ---
> Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt | 1 +
> include/linux/interrupt.h | 1 +
> include/trace/events/irq.h | 3 ++-
> kernel/rcutree.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++----
> kernel/rcutree.h | 1 +
> kernel/rcutree_plugin.h | 9 +++++++++
> kernel/softirq.c | 2 +-
> tools/perf/util/trace-event-parse.c | 1 +
> 8 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Paul? Unless this patch is the obviously correct solution everyone
wants to have, the other obviously correct solution is to do the
revert ...
Thanks,
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