linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll

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: <003601d3c4d1$fe4c0440$fae40cc0$@net>
Date:   Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:13:48 -0700
From:   "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
To:     "'Rik van Riel'" <riel@...riel.com>,
        "'Rafael J. Wysocki'" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     "'Linux PM'" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "'Frederic Weisbecker'" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
        "'Thomas Gleixner'" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "'Paul McKenney'" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "'Thomas Ilsche'" <thomas.ilsche@...dresden.de>,
        "'Aubrey Li'" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
        "'Mike Galbraith'" <mgalbraith@...e.de>,
        "'LKML'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Doug Smythies" <dsmythies@...us.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] cpuidle: poll_state: Add time limit to poll_idle()

On 2018.03.25 23:00 Doug Smythies wrote: 
> On 2018.03.25 14:25 Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-03-25 at 23:34 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 25, 2018 10:15:52 PM CEST Rik van Riel wrote:

...[snip]...

>>>> 
>>>> OK, I am still seeing a performance
>>>> degradation with the above, though
>>>> not throughout the entire workload.
>>>> 
>>>> It appears that making the idle loop
>>>> do anything besides cpu_relax() for
>>>> a significant amount of time slows
>>>> things down.
>>> 
>>> I see. 
>
> I have no proof, but I do not see that as
> the problem.
>
> I think the issue is the overall exiting
> and then re-entering idle state 0 much
> more often, and the related overheads, where
> interrupts are disabled for short periods.
>
> My jury rigged way of trying to create similar
> conditions seems to always have the ISR return with
> the need_resched() flag set, so there is no difference
> in idle state 0 entries per unit time between kernel
> 4.16-rc6 and one with the poll fixes added.
>
> i.e. the difference between these numbers over some time:
>
> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpuidle/state0/usage
>
> Rik, I wonder if you see a difference with your real
> workflow?

Using iperf, I was able to show a difference on my computer.
Another computer was used as the server, and my test computer
was the client. (the other way around didn't show a difference)

With Kernel 4.16-rc6 I got about ~2000 idle state 0 entries
per minute and ~155 seconds residency. ~32 watts package power.

With the poll stuff included I got ~46000 idle state 0 entries
per minute and ~53 seconds residency. ~20 watts package power.  

... Doug