| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 10:17:56 -0400
From: Alex Kogan <alex.kogan@...cle.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: linux@...linux.org.uk, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
Jan Glauber <jglauber@...vell.com>,
Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
dave.dice@...cle.com, Alex Kogan <alex.kogan@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/5] Add NUMA-awareness to qspinlock
Hi, Peter, Longman (and everyone on this list),
Hope you are doing well.
I was wondering whether you have had a chance to review this series,
and have any further comments.
Thanks,
— Alex
> On Apr 3, 2020, at 4:59 PM, Alex Kogan <alex.kogan@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> Changes from v9:
> ----------------
>
> - Revise the series based on Peter's version, adopting names, style, etc.
>
> - Add a new patch that allows to prioritize certain threads (e.g., in
> irq and nmi contexts) and avoids moving them between waiting queues,
> based on the suggestion by Longman.
>
> - Drop the shuffle reduction optimization from the series (new performance
> data did not justify it).
>
> - Do not call cna_init_nodes() as an early_initcall (call it from
> cna_configure_spin_lock_slowpath() instead), based on the comment from
> Longman.
>
>
> Summary
> -------
>
> Lock throughput can be increased by handing a lock to a waiter on the
> same NUMA node as the lock holder, provided care is taken to avoid
> starvation of waiters on other NUMA nodes. This patch introduces CNA
> (compact NUMA-aware lock) as the slow path for qspinlock. It is
> enabled through a configuration option (NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS).
>
> CNA is a NUMA-aware version of the MCS lock. Spinning threads are
> organized in two queues, a primary queue for threads running on the same
> node as the current lock holder, and a secondary queue for threads
> running on other nodes. Threads store the ID of the node on which
> they are running in their queue nodes. After acquiring the MCS lock and
> before acquiring the spinlock, the lock holder scans the primary queue
> looking for a thread running on the same node (pre-scan). If found (call
> it thread T), all threads in the primary queue between the current lock
> holder and T are moved to the end of the secondary queue. If such T
> is not found, we make another scan of the primary queue after acquiring
> the spinlock when unlocking the MCS lock (post-scan), starting at the
> node where pre-scan stopped. If both scans fail to find such T, the
> MCS lock is passed to the first thread in the secondary queue. If the
> secondary queue is empty, the MCS lock is passed to the next thread in the
> primary queue. To avoid starvation of threads in the secondary queue, those
> threads are moved back to the head of the primary queue after a certain
> number of intra-node lock hand-offs. Lastly, certain threads (e.g., in
> in irq and nmi contexts) are given a preferential treatment -- the scan
> stops when such a thread is found, effectively never moving those threads
> into the secondary queue.
>
> More details are available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.05600.
>
> We have done some performance evaluation with the locktorture module
> as well as with several benchmarks from the will-it-scale repo.
> The following locktorture results are from an Oracle X5-4 server
> (four Intel Xeon E7-8895 v3 @ 2.60GHz sockets with 18 hyperthreaded
> cores each). Each number represents an average (over 25 runs) of the
> total number of ops (x10^7) reported at the end of each run. The
> standard deviation is also reported in (), and in general is about 3%
> from the average. The 'stock' kernel is v5.6.0-rc6,
> commit 5ad0ec0b8652, compiled in the default configuration.
> 'patch-CNA' is the modified kernel with NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS set;
> the speedup is calculated dividing 'patch-CNA' by 'stock'.
>
> #thr stock patch-CNA speedup (patch-CNA/stock)
> 1 2.702 (0.100) 2.712 (0.122) 1.003
> 2 3.691 (0.162) 3.672 (0.138) 0.995
> 4 4.285 (0.108) 4.256 (0.124) 0.993
> 8 5.117 (0.133) 5.972 (0.258) 1.167
> 16 6.273 (0.196) 7.628 (0.274) 1.216
> 32 6.757 (0.122) 8.544 (0.225) 1.264
> 36 6.761 (0.091) 8.691 (0.170) 1.285
> 72 6.569 (0.132) 9.280 (0.225) 1.413
> 108 6.167 (0.112) 9.410 (0.171) 1.526
> 142 5.901 (0.117) 9.415 (0.211) 1.595
>
> The following tables contain throughput results (ops/us) from the same
> setup for will-it-scale/open1_threads:
>
> #thr stock patch-CNA speedup (patch-CNA/stock)
> 1 0.511 (0.002) 0.525 (0.003) 1.027
> 2 0.774 (0.018) 0.769 (0.017) 0.993
> 4 1.352 (0.023) 1.372 (0.032) 1.014
> 8 1.675 (0.090) 1.660 (0.136) 0.991
> 16 1.665 (0.114) 1.583 (0.092) 0.951
> 32 0.966 (0.038) 1.637 (0.087) 1.694
> 36 0.973 (0.066) 1.570 (0.081) 1.613
> 72 0.844 (0.040) 1.620 (0.091) 1.919
> 108 0.836 (0.040) 1.670 (0.084) 1.999
> 142 0.799 (0.043) 1.699 (0.087) 2.127
>
> and will-it-scale/lock2_threads:
>
> #thr stock patch-CNA speedup (patch-CNA/stock)
> 1 1.581 (0.004) 1.576 (0.007) 0.997
> 2 2.699 (0.059) 2.687 (0.067) 0.996
> 4 5.240 (0.234) 5.155 (0.252) 0.984
> 8 4.370 (0.241) 4.111 (0.342) 0.941
> 16 4.152 (0.112) 4.113 (0.164) 0.991
> 32 2.579 (0.099) 4.099 (0.127) 1.589
> 36 2.604 (0.066) 4.005 (0.104) 1.538
> 72 2.028 (0.091) 4.024 (0.112) 1.984
> 108 2.079 (0.106) 3.997 (0.093) 1.923
> 142 1.858 (0.103) 3.955 (0.109) 2.129
>
> Our evaluation shows that CNA also improves performance of user
> applications that have hot pthread mutexes. Those mutexes are
> blocking, and waiting threads park and unpark via the futex
> mechanism in the kernel. Given that kernel futex chains, which
> are hashed by the mutex address, are each protected by a
> chain-specific spin lock, the contention on a user-mode mutex
> translates into contention on a kernel level spinlock.
>
> Here are the results for the leveldb ‘readrandom’ benchmark:
>
> #thr stock patch-CNA speedup (patch-CNA/stock)
> 1 0.530 (0.013) 0.533 (0.011) 1.006
> 2 0.839 (0.043) 0.847 (0.031) 1.010
> 4 0.758 (0.021) 0.764 (0.018) 1.008
> 8 0.677 (0.022) 0.682 (0.016) 1.008
> 16 0.714 (0.023) 0.814 (0.027) 1.140
> 32 0.765 (0.040) 1.168 (0.032) 1.527
> 36 0.706 (0.023) 1.139 (0.066) 1.614
> 72 0.624 (0.017) 1.184 (0.026) 1.898
> 108 0.605 (0.013) 1.147 (0.023) 1.894
> 142 0.593 (0.012) 1.131 (0.019) 1.908
>
> Further comments are welcome and appreciated.
>
> Alex Kogan (5):
> locking/qspinlock: Rename mcs lock/unlock macros and make them more
> generic
> locking/qspinlock: Refactor the qspinlock slow path
> locking/qspinlock: Introduce CNA into the slow path of qspinlock
> locking/qspinlock: Introduce starvation avoidance into CNA
> locking/qspinlock: Avoid moving certain threads between waiting queues
> in CNA
>
> .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 18 +
> arch/arm/include/asm/mcs_spinlock.h | 6 +-
> arch/x86/Kconfig | 20 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 6 +
> arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 2 +
> include/asm-generic/mcs_spinlock.h | 4 +-
> kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h | 20 +-
> kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 82 +++-
> kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h | 407 ++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/locking/qspinlock_paravirt.h | 2 +-
> 10 files changed, 544 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h
>
> --
> 2.21.1 (Apple Git-122.3)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists