| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 11:16:07 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clockevents: Per cpu tick skew boot option
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:20:58PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 11:44 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 May 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 21:17 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 6 May 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > + skew_tick= [KNL] Offset the periodic timer tick per cpu to mitigate
> > > > > + xtime_lock contention on larger systems. Note: increases
> > > > > + power consumption, and should only be enabled if running
> > > > > + jitter sensitive (HPC/RT) workloads.
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > The "=" is wrong as skew_tick should not take parameters. It's
> > > > disabled by default. So "skew_tick" simply enables it, right ?
> > >
> > > Unless as I have RT set up, it's turned on by default, so '=' lets the
> > > user turn it back off.
> >
> > Then the doc should say what's the parameter after the "+" is :)
>
> I only put anything there because boss said "Document", I was hiding it
> along with fugly but damn useful <koff> HPC/RT cpuset patch ;-)
>
> Let the user decide whether power consumption or jitter is the
> more important consideration for their machines.
>
> Quoting removal commit af5ab277ded04bd9bc6b048c5a2f0e7d70ef0867
> Historically, Linux has tried to make the regular timer tick on the
> various CPUs not happen at the same time, to avoid contention on
> xtime_lock.
>
> Nowadays, with the tickless kernel, this contention no longer happens
> since time keeping and updating are done differently. In addition,
> this skew is actually hurting power consumption in a measurable way on
> many-core systems.
> End quote
>
> Problems:
>
> - Contrary to the above, systems do encounter contention on both
> xtime_lock and RCU structure locks when the tick is synchronized.
>
> - Moderate sized RT systems suffer intolerable jitter due to the tick
> being synchronized.
>
> - SGI reports the same for their large systems.
>
> - Fully utilized systems reap no power saving benefit from skew removal,
> but do suffer from resulting induced lock contention.
>
> - 0209f649 rcu: limit rcu_node leaf-level fanout
> This patch was born to combat lock contention which testing showed
> to have been _induced by_ skew removal. Skew the tick, contention
> disappeared virtually completely.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
>
> ---
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 9 +++++++++
> kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2426,6 +2426,15 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes
>
> sched_debug [KNL] Enables verbose scheduler debug messages.
>
> + skew_tick= [KNL] Offset the periodic timer tick per cpu to mitigate
> + xtime_lock contention on larger systems, and/or RCU lock
> + contention on all systems with CONFIG_MAXSMP set.
Suggest instead:
contention on systems with large CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT
values.
> + Format: { "0" | "1" }
> + 0 -- disable. (may be 1 via CONFIG_CMDLINE="skew_tick=1"
Suggest simply:
0 -- disable (default for typical kernel builds).
With these changes:
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> + 1 -- enable.
> + Note: increases power consumption, thus should only be
> + enabled if running jitter sensitive (HPC/RT) workloads.
> +
> security= [SECURITY] Choose a security module to enable at boot.
> If this boot parameter is not specified, only the first
> security module asking for security registration will be
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -814,6 +814,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart tick_sched_t
> return HRTIMER_RESTART;
> }
>
> +static int sched_skew_tick;
> +
> /**
> * tick_setup_sched_timer - setup the tick emulation timer
> */
> @@ -831,6 +833,14 @@ void tick_setup_sched_timer(void)
> /* Get the next period (per cpu) */
> hrtimer_set_expires(&ts->sched_timer, tick_init_jiffy_update());
>
> + /* Offset the tick to avert xtime_lock contention. */
> + if (sched_skew_tick) {
> + u64 offset = ktime_to_ns(tick_period) >> 1;
> + do_div(offset, num_possible_cpus());
> + offset *= smp_processor_id();
> + hrtimer_add_expires_ns(&ts->sched_timer, offset);
> + }
> +
> for (;;) {
> hrtimer_forward(&ts->sched_timer, now, tick_period);
> hrtimer_start_expires(&ts->sched_timer,
> @@ -910,3 +920,12 @@ int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_
> tick_nohz_switch_to_nohz();
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +static int __init skew_tick(char *str)
> +{
> + get_option(&str, &sched_skew_tick);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +early_param("skew_tick", skew_tick);
> +
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
--
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