linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH RT] rwsem: The return of multi-reader PI rwsems

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: <20140410180203.79c08bfa@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:02:03 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH RT] rwsem: The return of multi-reader PI rwsems

On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 14:30:03 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 03:17:41PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:36:17 +0200
> > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > It defaults to the total number of CPUs in the system, given the default
> > > setup (all CPUs in a single balance domain), this should result in all
> > > CPUs working concurrently on the boosted read sides.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, it currently defaults to the number of possible CPUs in
> > the system. I should probably move the default assignment to after SMP
> > is setup. Currently it happens in early boot before all the CPUs are
> > running. On boot up, the limit is set to NR_CPUS which should be much
> > higher than what the system has, but shouldn't matter during boot. But
> > after all the CPUs are up and running, it can lower it to online CPUs.
> 
> Another approach is to use nr_cpu_ids, which is the maximum number of
> CPUs that the particular booting system could ever have.  I use this in
> RCU to resize the data structures down from their NR_CPUS compile-time
> hugeness.
> 

OK, also, in doing our benchmarks, there's a big difference with
rt_rw_limit being num_online_cpus and 2 * num_online_cpus. It doesn't
seem to get better adding more than that. This was shown on a case with
12 cpus as well as 8 cpus. Same result.

I really like to see a real use case benefit to find the best default.
But as our mmap_sem stress test shows 2xCPUS as being the best, I'm
going to go with that until someone comes up with a better test.

-- Steve
--
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/