linux-kernel - [RFC][PATCH 3/3] cpuidle: count double the exit latency

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

Message-ID: <20120823171356.32d3a807@cuia.bos.redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Aug 2012 17:13:56 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, ShuoX Liu <shuox.liu@...el.com>,
	mjg59@...f.ucam.org, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@....com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Deepthi Dharwar <deepthi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 3/3] cpuidle: count double the exit latency

In some workloads, for example web servers talking to database servers,
a task on one CPU will wake up a task on another CPU, wait for that
other CPU to handle the job, and get the result back.  Each of those
wakeups is likely to incur the c-state exit latency.

By only counting the exit latency once, even though the round trip
involves two c-state exits, we can end up going into too deep a
c-state for the workload.

Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
---
 drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c |    9 ++++++---
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
index 47b1150..ccdb348 100644
--- a/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
+++ b/drivers/cpuidle/governors/menu.c
@@ -378,10 +378,13 @@ static void menu_update(struct cpuidle_driver *drv, struct cpuidle_device *dev)
 	/*
 	 * We correct for the exit latency; we are assuming here that the
 	 * exit latency happens after the event that we're interested in.
+	 * Pessimistically assume that we got woken up by another CPU,
+	 * so we count its exit latency, too.
 	 */
-	if (measured_us > data->exit_us)
-		measured_us -= data->exit_us;
-
+	if (measured_us > 2 * data->exit_us)
+		measured_us -= 2 * data->exit_us;
+	else
+		measured_us = 0;
 
 	/* update our correction ratio */
 

--
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/