| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <DM6PR18MB246096BE8C516A5A5D125932D98E0@DM6PR18MB2460.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 13:37:17 +0000
From: Shijith Thotton <sthotton@...vell.com>
To: Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: "subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com" <subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com>,
"dhaval.giani@...cle.com" <dhaval.giani@...cle.com>,
"rohit.k.jain@...cle.com" <rohit.k.jain@...cle.com>,
"daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com" <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
"pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com" <pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com>,
"matt@...eblueprint.co.uk" <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
"umgwanakikbuti@...il.com" <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
"riel@...hat.com" <riel@...hat.com>,
"jbacik@...com" <jbacik@...com>,
"juri.lelli@...hat.com" <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...vell.com>,
Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair <jnair@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] steal tasks to improve CPU utilization
On 22-Oct-18 8:40 PM, Steve Sistare wrote:
>
> When a CPU has no more CFS tasks to run, and idle_balance() fails to
> find a task, then attempt to steal a task from an overloaded CPU in the
> same LLC. Maintain and use a bitmap of overloaded CPUs to efficiently
> identify candidates. To minimize search time, steal the first migratable
> task that is found when the bitmap is traversed. For fairness, search
> for migratable tasks on an overloaded CPU in order of next to run.
>
> This simple stealing yields a higher CPU utilization than idle_balance()
> alone, because the search is cheap, so it may be called every time the CPU
> is about to go idle. idle_balance() does more work because it searches
> widely for the busiest queue, so to limit its CPU consumption, it declines
> to search if the system is too busy. Simple stealing does not offload the
> globally busiest queue, but it is much better than running nothing at all.
>
> The bitmap of overloaded CPUs is a new type of sparse bitmap, designed to
> reduce cache contention vs the usual bitmap when many threads concurrently
> set, clear, and visit elements.
>
> Patch 1 defines the sparsemask type and its operations.
>
> Patches 2, 3, and 4 implement the bitmap of overloaded CPUs.
>
> Patches 5 and 6 refactor existing code for a cleaner merge of later
> patches.
>
> Patches 7 and 8 implement task stealing using the overloaded CPUs bitmap.
>
> Patch 9 disables stealing on systems with more than 2 NUMA nodes for the
> time being because of performance regressions that are not due to stealing
> per-se. See the patch description for details.
>
> Patch 10 adds schedstats for comparing the new behavior to the old, and
> provided as a convenience for developers only, not for integration.
>
> The patch series is based on kernel 4.19.0-rc7. It compiles, boots, and
> runs with/without each of CONFIG_SCHED_SMT, CONFIG_SMP, CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG,
> and CONFIG_PREEMPT. It runs without error with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT +
> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG + CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC + CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES +
> CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK + CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP. CPU hot plug and CPU
> bandwidth control were tested.
>
> Stealing imprroves utilization with only a modest CPU overhead in scheduler
> code. In the following experiment, hackbench is run with varying numbers
> of groups (40 tasks per group), and the delta in /proc/schedstat is shown
> for each run, averaged per CPU, augmented with these non-standard stats:
>
> %find - percent of time spent in old and new functions that search for
> idle CPUs and tasks to steal and set the overloaded CPUs bitmap.
>
> steal - number of times a task is stolen from another CPU.
>
> X6-2: 1 socket * 10 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 20 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> hackbench <grps> process 100000
> sched_wakeup_granularity_ns=15000000
>
> baseline
> grps time %busy slice sched idle wake %find steal
> 1 8.084 75.02 0.10 105476 46291 59183 0.31 0
> 2 13.892 85.33 0.10 190225 70958 119264 0.45 0
> 3 19.668 89.04 0.10 263896 87047 176850 0.49 0
> 4 25.279 91.28 0.10 322171 94691 227474 0.51 0
> 8 47.832 94.86 0.09 630636 144141 486322 0.56 0
>
> new
> grps time %busy slice sched idle wake %find steal %speedup
> 1 5.938 96.80 0.24 31255 7190 24061 0.63 7433 36.1
> 2 11.491 99.23 0.16 74097 4578 69512 0.84 19463 20.9
> 3 16.987 99.66 0.15 115824 1985 113826 0.77 24707 15.8
> 4 22.504 99.80 0.14 167188 2385 164786 0.75 29353 12.3
> 8 44.441 99.86 0.11 389153 1616 387401 0.67 38190 7.6
>
> Elapsed time improves by 8 to 36%, and CPU busy utilization is up
> by 5 to 22% hitting 99% for 2 or more groups (80 or more tasks).
> The cost is at most 0.4% more find time.
>
> Additional performance results follow. A negative "speedup" is a
> regression. Note: for all hackbench runs, sched_wakeup_granularity_ns
> is set to 15 msec. Otherwise, preemptions increase at higher loads and
> distort the comparison between baseline and new.
>
> ------------------ 1 Socket Results ------------------
>
> X6-2: 1 socket * 10 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 20 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> Average of 10 runs of: hackbench <groups> process 100000
>
> --- base -- --- new ---
> groups time %stdev time %stdev %speedup
> 1 8.008 0.1 5.905 0.2 35.6
> 2 13.814 0.2 11.438 0.1 20.7
> 3 19.488 0.2 16.919 0.1 15.1
> 4 25.059 0.1 22.409 0.1 11.8
> 8 47.478 0.1 44.221 0.1 7.3
>
> X6-2: 1 socket * 22 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 44 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> Average of 10 runs of: hackbench <groups> process 100000
>
> --- base -- --- new ---
> groups time %stdev time %stdev %speedup
> 1 4.586 0.8 4.596 0.6 -0.3
> 2 7.693 0.2 5.775 1.3 33.2
> 3 10.442 0.3 8.288 0.3 25.9
> 4 13.087 0.2 11.057 0.1 18.3
> 8 24.145 0.2 22.076 0.3 9.3
> 16 43.779 0.1 41.741 0.2 4.8
>
> KVM 4-cpu
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz
> tbench, average of 11 runs.
>
> clients %speedup
> 1 16.2
> 2 11.7
> 4 9.9
> 8 12.8
> 16 13.7
>
> KVM 2-cpu
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz
>
> Benchmark %speedup
> specjbb2015_critical_jops 5.7
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_mutex_2 40.6
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_oltp_2 3.9
>
> ------------------ 2 Socket Results ------------------
>
> X6-2: 2 sockets * 10 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 40 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> Average of 10 runs of: hackbench <groups> process 100000
>
> --- base -- --- new ---
> groups time %stdev time %stdev %speedup
> 1 7.945 0.2 7.219 8.7 10.0
> 2 8.444 0.4 6.689 1.5 26.2
> 3 12.100 1.1 9.962 2.0 21.4
> 4 15.001 0.4 13.109 1.1 14.4
> 8 27.960 0.2 26.127 0.3 7.0
>
> X6-2: 2 sockets * 22 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 88 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> Average of 10 runs of: hackbench <groups> process 100000
>
> --- base -- --- new ---
> groups time %stdev time %stdev %speedup
> 1 5.826 5.4 5.840 5.0 -0.3
> 2 5.041 5.3 6.171 23.4 -18.4
> 3 6.839 2.1 6.324 3.8 8.1
> 4 8.177 0.6 7.318 3.6 11.7
> 8 14.429 0.7 13.966 1.3 3.3
> 16 26.401 0.3 25.149 1.5 4.9
>
>
> X6-2: 2 sockets * 22 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 88 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz
> Oracle database OLTP, logging disabled, NVRAM storage
>
> Customers Users %speedup
> 1200000 40 -1.2
> 2400000 80 2.7
> 3600000 120 8.9
> 4800000 160 4.4
> 6000000 200 3.0
>
> X6-2: 2 sockets * 14 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 56 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz
> Results from the Oracle "Performance PIT".
>
> Benchmark %speedup
>
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_rndrd 19.6
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_seqrd 12.1
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_rndwr 0.4
> mysql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_seqrewr -0.3
>
> pgsql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_rndrd 19.5
> pgsql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_seqrd 8.6
> pgsql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_rndwr 1.0
> pgsql_sysb1.0.14_fileio_56_seqrewr 0.5
>
> opatch_time_ASM_12.2.0.1.0_HP2M 7.5
> select-1_users-warm_asmm_ASM_12.2.0.1.0_HP2M 5.1
> select-1_users_asmm_ASM_12.2.0.1.0_HP2M 4.4
> swingbenchv3_asmm_soebench_ASM_12.2.0.1.0_HP2M 5.8
>
> lm3_memlat_L2 4.8
> lm3_memlat_L1 0.0
>
> ub_gcc_56CPUs-56copies_Pipe-based_Context_Switching 60.1
> ub_gcc_56CPUs-56copies_Shell_Scripts_1_concurrent 5.2
> ub_gcc_56CPUs-56copies_Shell_Scripts_8_concurrent -3.0
> ub_gcc_56CPUs-56copies_File_Copy_1024_bufsize_2000_maxblocks 2.4
>
> X5-2: 2 sockets * 18 cores * 2 hyperthreads = 72 CPUs
> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz
>
> NAS_OMP
> bench class ncpu %improved(Mops)
> dc B 72 1.3
> is C 72 0.9
> is D 72 0.7
>
> sysbench mysql, average of 24 runs
> --- base --- --- new ---
> nthr events %stdev events %stdev %speedup
> 1 331.0 0.25 331.0 0.24 -0.1
> 2 661.3 0.22 661.8 0.22 0.0
> 4 1297.0 0.88 1300.5 0.82 0.2
> 8 2420.8 0.04 2420.5 0.04 -0.1
> 16 4826.3 0.07 4825.4 0.05 -0.1
> 32 8815.3 0.27 8830.2 0.18 0.1
> 64 12823.0 0.24 12823.6 0.26 0.0
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Steve Sistare (10):
> sched: Provide sparsemask, a reduced contention bitmap
> sched/topology: Provide hooks to allocate data shared per LLC
> sched/topology: Provide cfs_overload_cpus bitmap
> sched/fair: Dynamically update cfs_overload_cpus
> sched/fair: Hoist idle_stamp up from idle_balance
> sched/fair: Generalize the detach_task interface
> sched/fair: Provide can_migrate_task_llc
> sched/fair: Steal work from an overloaded CPU when CPU goes idle
> sched/fair: disable stealing if too many NUMA nodes
> sched/fair: Provide idle search schedstats
>
> include/linux/sched/topology.h | 1 +
> include/linux/sparsemask.h | 260 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/sched/core.c | 30 +++-
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 338 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> kernel/sched/features.h | 6 +
> kernel/sched/sched.h | 13 +-
> kernel/sched/stats.c | 11 +-
> kernel/sched/stats.h | 13 ++
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 117 +++++++++++++-
> lib/Makefile | 2 +-
> lib/sparsemask.c | 142 +++++++++++++++++
> 11 files changed, 898 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/sparsemask.h
> create mode 100644 lib/sparsemask.c
>
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
>
Hi Steve,
Tried your patchset on ThunderX2 with 2 nodes. Please find my observations below.
Hackbench was run on single node due to variance on 2 nodes and it showed
improvement under load.
Single node hackbench numbers:
group old time new time steals %change
1 6.717 7.275 21 -8.31
2 8.449 9.268 106 -9.69
3 12.035 12.761 173071 -6.03
4 14.648 9.787 595889 33.19
8 22.513 18.329 2397394 18.58
16 39.861 36.263 3949903 9.06
column "new time" shows hackbench runtime in seconds with the patchset.
Tried below benchmarks with 2 nodes, but no performance benefit/degradation was
observed on multiple runs.
- MySQL (read/write/PS etc with sysbench)
- HHVM running oss-performance benchmarks
Shijith
Powered by blists - more mailing lists