[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1371067399.1746.47.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:03:19 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
赖江山 <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, niv@...ibm.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Silas Boyd-Wickizer <sbw@....edu>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC ticketlock] Auto-queued ticketlock
On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 11:15 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Davidlohr Bueso
> <davidlohr.bueso@...com> wrote:
> >
> > * short: is the big winner for this patch, +69% throughput improvement
> > with 100-2000 users. This makes a lot of sense since the workload spends
> > a ridiculous amount of time trying to acquire the d_lock:
> >
> > 84.86% 1569902 reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock
> > |
> > --- _raw_spin_lock
> > |
> > |--49.96%-- dget_parent
> > | __fsnotify_parent
> > |--49.71%-- dput
>
> Ugh. Do you have any idea what the heck that thing actually does?
Waiman's dcache patchet were actually an attempt to address these exact
issues: http://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/22/716
According to him:
"the short workload calls security functions like getpwnam(),
getpwuid(), getgrgid() a couple of times. These functions open
the /etc/passwd or /etc/group files, read their content and close the
files.
It is the intensive open/read/close sequence from multiple threads that
is causing 80%+ contention in the d_lock on a system with large number
of cores. The MIT's MOSBench paper also outlined dentry reference
counting as a scalability roadblock for its Apache and Exim tests."
>
> Normally, we shouldn't see lots of dget contention, since the dcache
> these days does everything but the last path component locklessly.
>
> But there's a few exceptions, like symlinks (act as "last component"
> in the middle). And obviously, if some crazy threaded program opens
> the *same* file concurrently over and over again, then that "last
> component" will hammer on the dentry lock of that particular path. But
> that "open the same file concurrently" seems totally unrealistic -
> although maybe that's what AIM does..
>
> Anybody know the AIM subtests?
>
> Also, we *may* actually be able to optimize this by making
> dentry->d_count atomic, which will allow us to often do dget_parent
> and put() without taking the dcache lock at all. That's what it used
> to be, but the RCU patches actually made it be protected by the
> d_lock. It made sense at the time, as a step in the sequence, and many
> of the dentry d_count accesses are under the lock, but now that the
> remaining hot-paths are dget_parent and dput and many of the dentry
> d_count increments are gone from the hot-paths, we might want to
> re-visit that decision. It could go either way.
I did a quick attempt at this (patch attached). For the short workload,
we now have:
76.90% 928688 reaim [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock
|
--- _raw_spin_lock
|
|--99.69%-- dget_parent
| __fsnotify_parent
| |
| |--20.23%-- fsnotify_access
| | vfs_read
| |--20.13%-- __fput
| | ____fput
| | task_work_run
| |--20.07%-- security_file_permission
| | rw_verify_area
| | vfs_read
| |--19.97%-- do_sys_open
| | SyS_open
| --19.60%-- security_file_open
| do_dentry_open
Still 76%!!! Throughput wise we do have a very nice boost when compared
to the vanilla kernel:
10-100 users: +47%
100-1000 users: +76%
1000-2000 users: +76%
Thanks,
Davidlohr
View attachment "atomic_dcount.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (15385 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists