[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1469101514-49475-4-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:45:13 -0400
From: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel-request@...ts.xenproject.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
will.deacon@....com, kernellwp@...il.com, jgross@...e.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, bsingharora@...il.com,
Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 3/4] locking/osq: Drop the overhead of osq_lock()
An over-committed guest with more vCPUs than pCPUs has a heavy overhead in
osq_lock().
This is because vCPU A hold the osq lock and yield out, vCPU B wait per_cpu
node->locked to be set. IOW, vCPU B wait vCPU A to run and unlock the osq
lock.
Kernel has an interface bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu) to see if a vCPU is
currently running or not. So break the spin loops on true condition.
test case:
perf record -a perf bench sched messaging -g 400 -p && perf report
before patch:
18.09% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] osq_lock
12.28% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
5.27% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_unlock
3.89% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] wait_consider_task
3.64% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] _raw_write_lock_irq
3.41% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner.is
2.49% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call
after patch:
20.68% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
8.45% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_unlock
4.12% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call
3.01% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call_common
2.83% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] copypage_power7
2.64% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
2.00% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] osq_lock
Suggested-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 05a3785..858a0ed 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ static inline int encode_cpu(int cpu_nr)
return cpu_nr + 1;
}
+static inline int node_cpu(struct optimistic_spin_node *node)
+{
+ return node->cpu - 1;
+}
+
static inline struct optimistic_spin_node *decode_cpu(int encoded_cpu_val)
{
int cpu_nr = encoded_cpu_val - 1;
@@ -118,8 +123,11 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
/*
* If we need to reschedule bail... so we can block.
+ * Use vcpu_is_preempted to detech lock holder preemption issue
+ * and break the loop. vcpu_is_preempted is a macro defined by
+ * false if arch does not support vcpu preempted check,
*/
- if (need_resched())
+ if (need_resched() || vcpu_is_preempted(node_cpu(node->prev)))
goto unqueue;
cpu_relax_lowlatency();
--
2.4.11
Powered by blists - more mailing lists