| 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: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 09:53:13 +0530
From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
To: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, gautham.shenoy@....com,
aaron.lu@...el.com, wuyun.abel@...edance.com, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] sched/fair: Add a per-shard overload flag
Hello David,
Some more test results (although this might be slightly irrelevant with
next version around the corner)
On 9/1/2023 12:41 AM, David Vernet wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 04:15:08PM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
>
> Hi Prateek,
>
>> Even with the two patches, I still observe the following lock
>> contention when profiling the tbench 128-clients run with IBS:
>>
>> - 12.61% swapper [kernel.vmlinux] [k] native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
>> - 10.94% native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
>> - 10.73% _raw_spin_lock
>> - 9.57% __schedule
>> schedule_idle
>> do_idle
>> + cpu_startup_entry
>> - 0.82% task_rq_lock
>> newidle_balance
>> pick_next_task_fair
>> __schedule
>> schedule_idle
>> do_idle
>> + cpu_startup_entry
>>
>> Since David mentioned rq->avg_idle check is probably not the right step
>> towards the solution, this experiment introduces a per-shard
>> "overload" flag. Similar to "rq->rd->overload", per-shard overload flag
>> notifies of the possibility of one or more rq covered in the shard's
>> domain having a queued task. shard's overload flag is set at the same
>> time as "rq->rd->overload", and is cleared when shard's list is found
>> to be empty.
>
> I think this is an interesting idea, but I feel that it's still working
> against the core proposition of SHARED_RUNQ, which is to enable work
> conservation.
>
I have some more numbers. This time I'm accounting the cost for peeking
into the shared-runq and have two variants - one that keeps the current
vanilla flow from your v3 and the other that moves the rq->avg_idle
check before looking at the shared-runq. Following are the results:
-> Without EEVDF
o tl;dr
- With avg_idle check, the improvements observed with shared-runq
aren't as large but they are still noticeable.
- Most regressions are gone nad the others aren't as bad with the
introduction of shared-runq
o Kernels
base : tip is at commit 88c56cfeaec4 ("sched/fair: Block nohz tick_stop when cfs bandwidth in use")
shared_runq : base + correct time accounting with v3 of the series without any other changes
shared_runq_idle_check : shared_runq + move the rq->avg_idle check before peeking into the shared_runq
(the rd->overload check still remains below the shared_runq access)
o Benchmarks
==================================================================
Test : hackbench
Units : Normalized time in seconds
Interpretation: Lower is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Case: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.64) 0.90 [ 10.20]( 8.79) 0.93 [ 7.08]( 3.87)
2-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.97) 0.85 [ 15.06]( 4.86) 0.96 [ 4.47]( 2.22)
4-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.84) 0.93 [ 7.38]( 2.63) 0.94 [ 6.07]( 1.02)
8-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.24) 0.97 [ 2.83]( 2.69) 0.98 [ 1.82]( 1.01)
16-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.31) 1.03 [ -2.93]( 2.46) 1.02 [ -1.61]( 1.34)
==================================================================
Test : tbench
Units : Normalized throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Clients: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.08) 0.98 [ -1.89]( 0.48) 0.99 [ -0.73]( 0.70)
2 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.69) 0.99 [ -1.48]( 0.24) 0.98 [ -1.62]( 0.85)
4 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.70) 0.97 [ -2.87]( 1.34) 0.98 [ -2.15]( 0.48)
8 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.85) 0.97 [ -3.17]( 1.56) 0.99 [ -1.32]( 1.09)
16 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.18) 0.91 [ -8.70]( 0.27) 0.98 [ -2.03]( 1.28)
32 1.00 [ 0.00]( 3.84) 0.51 [-48.53]( 2.52) 1.01 [ 1.41]( 3.83)
64 1.00 [ 0.00]( 7.06) 0.38 [-62.49]( 1.89) 1.05 [ 5.33]( 4.09)
128 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.88) 0.41 [-58.92]( 0.28) 1.01 [ 0.54]( 1.65)
256 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.88) 0.97 [ -2.56]( 1.78) 1.00 [ -0.48]( 0.33)
512 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.07) 1.00 [ 0.06]( 0.04) 0.98 [ -1.51]( 0.44)
1024 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.30) 0.99 [ -1.35]( 0.90) 1.00 [ -0.24]( 0.41)
==================================================================
Test : stream-10
Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : HMean
==================================================================
Test: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
Copy 1.00 [ 0.00]( 8.87) 1.00 [ 0.31]( 5.27) 1.09 [ 9.11]( 0.58)
Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.80) 0.99 [ -0.81]( 7.20) 1.00 [ 0.49]( 5.67)
Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 7.24) 0.99 [ -1.13]( 7.02) 1.02 [ 2.06]( 6.36)
Triad 1.00 [ 0.00]( 5.00) 0.96 [ -4.11]( 9.37) 1.03 [ 3.46]( 4.41)
==================================================================
Test : stream-100
Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : HMean
==================================================================
Test: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
Copy 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.45) 1.00 [ 0.32]( 1.88) 1.04 [ 4.02]( 1.45)
Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 4.40) 0.98 [ -1.76]( 6.46) 1.01 [ 1.28]( 1.00)
Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 4.97) 0.98 [ -1.85]( 6.01) 1.03 [ 2.75]( 0.24)
Triad 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.24) 0.96 [ -3.82]( 6.41) 0.99 [ -1.10]( 4.47)
==================================================================
Test : netperf
Units : Normalized Througput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Clients: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.46) 0.98 [ -2.37]( 0.08) 0.99 [ -1.32]( 0.37)
2-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.75) 0.98 [ -2.04]( 0.33) 0.98 [ -1.57]( 0.50)
4-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.84) 0.97 [ -3.25]( 1.01) 0.99 [ -0.77]( 0.54)
8-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.78) 0.96 [ -4.18]( 0.68) 0.99 [ -0.77]( 0.63)
16-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.56) 0.84 [-15.71]( 6.33) 1.00 [ -0.35]( 0.58)
32-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.03) 0.35 [-64.92]( 8.90) 0.98 [ -1.92]( 1.67)
64-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.69) 0.26 [-74.05]( 6.56) 0.98 [ -2.46]( 2.42)
128-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.91) 0.25 [-74.81]( 3.67) 0.99 [ -1.50]( 2.15)
256-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.21) 0.92 [ -7.73]( 2.29) 0.98 [ -1.51]( 1.85)
512-clients 1.00 [ 0.00](45.18) 0.96 [ -4.06](52.89) 0.98 [ -2.49](49.22)
==================================================================
Test : schbench
Units : Normalized 99th percentile latency in us
Interpretation: Lower is better
Statistic : Median
==================================================================
#workers: base[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1 1.00 [ -0.00](12.03) 1.04 [ -4.35](34.64) 1.13 [-13.04]( 2.25)
2 1.00 [ -0.00]( 9.36) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.56) 1.12 [-11.54](12.83)
4 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.95) 1.00 [ -0.00](13.36) 0.93 [ 6.67]( 9.10)
8 1.00 [ -0.00]( 9.01) 0.97 [ 2.70]( 4.68) 1.03 [ -2.70](12.11)
16 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.08) 1.02 [ -2.00]( 3.01) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 7.33)
32 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.75) 1.03 [ -2.60]( 8.20) 1.09 [ -9.09]( 4.24)
64 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.15) 0.91 [ 9.20]( 1.03) 1.01 [ -0.61]( 7.14)
128 1.00 [ -0.00]( 5.18) 1.05 [ -4.57]( 7.74) 1.01 [ -0.57]( 5.62)
256 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.18) 1.06 [ -5.87](51.02) 1.10 [ -9.51](15.82)
512 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.10) 1.03 [ -3.36]( 2.88) 1.06 [ -5.87]( 1.10)
==================================================================
Test : Unixbench
Units : Various, Throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean, Hmean (Specified)
==================================================================
base shared_runq shared_runq_idle_check
Hmean unixbench-dhry2reg-1 41407024.82 ( 0.00%) 41211208.57 ( -0.47%) 41354094.87 ( -0.13%)
Hmean unixbench-dhry2reg-512 6249629291.88 ( 0.00%) 6245782129.00 ( -0.06%) 6236514875.97 ( -0.21%)
Amean unixbench-syscall-1 2922580.63 ( 0.00%) 2928021.57 * -0.19%* 2895742.17 * 0.92%*
Amean unixbench-syscall-512 7606400.73 ( 0.00%) 8390396.33 * -10.31%* 8236409.00 * -8.28%*
Hmean unixbench-pipe-1 2574942.54 ( 0.00%) 2610825.75 * 1.39%* 2531492.38 * -1.69%*
Hmean unixbench-pipe-512 364489246.31 ( 0.00%) 366388360.22 * 0.52%* 360160487.66 * -1.19%*
Hmean unixbench-spawn-1 4428.94 ( 0.00%) 4391.20 ( -0.85%) 4541.06 ( 2.53%)
Hmean unixbench-spawn-512 68883.47 ( 0.00%) 69143.38 ( 0.38%) 69776.01 * 1.30%*
Hmean unixbench-execl-1 3878.47 ( 0.00%) 3861.63 ( -0.43%) 3873.96 ( -0.12%)
Hmean unixbench-execl-512 11638.84 ( 0.00%) 12758.38 * 9.62%* 14001.23 * 20.30%*
==================================================================
Test : ycsb-mongodb
Units : Throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
tip : 1.00 (var: 1.41%)
shared_runq : 0.99 (var: 0.84%) (diff: -1.40%)
shared_runq_idle_check : 1.00 (var: 0.79%) (diff: 0.00%)
==================================================================
Test : DeathStarBench
Units : %diff, relative to base
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
pinning scaling eevdf shared_runq shared_runq_idle_check
1CDD 1 0% -0.39% -0.09%
2CDD 2 0% -0.31% -1.73%
4CDD 4 0% 3.28% 0.60%
8CDD 8 0% 4.35% 2.98%
-> With EEVDF
o tl;dr
- Same as what was observed without EEVDF but shared_runq shows
serious regression with multiple more variants of tbench and
netperf now.
o Kernels
eevdf : tip:sched/core at commit b41bbb33cf75 ("Merge branch 'sched/eevdf' into sched/core")
shared_runq : eevdf + correct time accounting with v3 of the series without any other changes
shared_runq_idle_check : shared_runq + move the rq->avg_idle check before peeking into the shared_runq
(the rd->overload check still remains below the shared_runq access)
==================================================================
Test : hackbench
Units : Normalized time in seconds
Interpretation: Lower is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Case: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.89) 0.95 [ 4.72]( 8.98) 0.99 [ 0.83]( 3.77)
2-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.04) 0.86 [ 13.87]( 2.59) 0.95 [ 4.92]( 1.98)
4-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.38) 0.96 [ 4.50]( 3.44) 0.98 [ 2.45]( 1.93)
8-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.52) 1.01 [ -0.95]( 1.36) 0.96 [ 3.97]( 0.89)
16-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.44) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.59) 0.96 [ 3.91]( 3.36)
==================================================================
Test : tbench
Units : Normalized throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Clients: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.18) 1.00 [ 0.15]( 0.59) 0.98 [ -1.76]( 0.74)
2 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.63) 0.97 [ -3.44]( 0.91) 0.98 [ -1.93]( 1.27)
4 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.86) 0.95 [ -4.86]( 0.85) 0.99 [ -1.15]( 0.77)
8 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.22) 0.94 [ -6.44]( 1.31) 0.99 [ -1.00]( 0.97)
16 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.99) 0.86 [-13.68]( 0.38) 1.00 [ -0.47]( 0.99)
32 1.00 [ 0.00]( 4.29) 0.48 [-52.21]( 0.53) 1.01 [ 1.24]( 6.66)
64 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.71) 0.35 [-64.68]( 0.44) 0.99 [ -0.66]( 0.70)
128 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.65) 0.40 [-60.32]( 0.95) 0.98 [ -2.15]( 1.25)
256 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.19) 0.72 [-28.28]( 1.88) 0.99 [ -1.39]( 2.50)
512 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.20) 0.79 [-20.59]( 4.40) 1.00 [ -0.42]( 0.38)
1024 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.29) 0.80 [-20.24]( 0.64) 0.99 [ -0.51]( 0.20)
==================================================================
Test : stream-10
Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : HMean
==================================================================
Test: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
Copy 1.00 [ 0.00]( 4.32) 0.94 [ -6.40]( 8.05) 1.01 [ 1.39]( 4.58)
Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 5.21) 0.98 [ -2.15]( 6.79) 0.95 [ -4.54]( 7.35)
Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.25) 0.97 [ -2.64]( 6.47) 0.97 [ -3.08]( 7.49)
Triad 1.00 [ 0.00](10.74) 1.01 [ 0.92]( 7.40) 1.01 [ 1.25]( 8.76)
==================================================================
Test : stream-100
Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : HMean
==================================================================
Test: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
Copy 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.70) 1.00 [ -0.07]( 0.70) 1.00 [ 0.47]( 0.94)
Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.55) 1.02 [ 1.72]( 4.83) 1.03 [ 2.96]( 1.00)
Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.53) 1.02 [ 1.53]( 4.77) 1.03 [ 3.19]( 0.90)
Triad 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.66) 1.00 [ 0.06]( 6.29) 0.99 [ -0.70]( 5.79)
==================================================================
Test : netperf
Units : Normalized Througput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
Clients: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.46) 1.02 [ 1.73]( 0.31) 0.99 [ -0.81]( 0.24)
2-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.38) 0.99 [ -0.68]( 1.17) 0.99 [ -0.87]( 0.45)
4-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.72) 0.97 [ -3.38]( 1.38) 0.99 [ -1.26]( 0.47)
8-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.98) 0.94 [ -6.30]( 1.84) 1.00 [ -0.44]( 0.45)
16-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.70) 0.56 [-44.08]( 5.11) 0.99 [ -0.83]( 0.49)
32-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.74) 0.35 [-64.92]( 1.98) 0.98 [ -2.14]( 2.14)
64-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.24) 0.26 [-73.79]( 5.72) 0.97 [ -2.57]( 2.44)
128-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.72) 0.25 [-74.91]( 6.72) 0.96 [ -3.66]( 1.48)
256-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 4.44) 0.68 [-31.60]( 5.42) 0.96 [ -3.61]( 3.64)
512-clients 1.00 [ 0.00](52.42) 0.67 [-32.81](48.45) 0.96 [ -3.80](55.24)
==================================================================
Test : schbench
Units : Normalized 99th percentile latency in us
Interpretation: Lower is better
Statistic : Median
==================================================================
#workers: eevdf[pct imp](CV) shared_runq[pct imp](CV) shared_runq_idle_check[pct imp](CV)
1 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.28) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.19) 0.84 [ 16.00](20.83)
2 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.42) 0.89 [ 10.71]( 2.34) 0.96 [ 3.57]( 4.17)
4 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.77) 0.97 [ 3.33]( 7.35) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 9.12)
8 1.00 [ -0.00](13.83) 1.03 [ -2.63]( 6.96) 0.95 [ 5.26]( 6.93)
16 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.37) 1.02 [ -2.13]( 4.17) 1.02 [ -2.13]( 3.53)
32 1.00 [ -0.00]( 8.69) 0.96 [ 3.70]( 5.23) 0.98 [ 2.47]( 4.43)
64 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.30) 0.96 [ 3.85]( 2.34) 0.92 [ 7.69]( 4.14)
128 1.00 [ -0.00](12.12) 0.97 [ 3.12]( 3.31) 0.93 [ 6.53]( 5.31)
256 1.00 [ -0.00](26.04) 1.87 [-86.57](33.02) 1.63 [-62.73](40.63)
512 1.00 [ -0.00]( 5.62) 1.04 [ -3.80]( 0.35) 1.09 [ -8.78]( 2.56)
==================================================================
Test : Unixbench
Units : Various, Throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean, Hmean (Specified)
==================================================================
eevdf shared_runq shared_runq_idle_check
Hmean unixbench-dhry2reg-1 41248390.97 ( 0.00%) 41245183.04 ( -0.01%) 41297801.58 ( 0.12%)
Hmean unixbench-dhry2reg-512 6239969914.15 ( 0.00%) 6236534715.56 ( -0.06%) 6237356670.12 ( -0.04%)
Amean unixbench-syscall-1 2968518.27 ( 0.00%) 2893792.10 * 2.52%* 2799609.00 * 5.69%*
Amean unixbench-syscall-512 7790656.20 ( 0.00%) 8489302.67 * -8.97%* 7685974.47 * 1.34%*
Hmean unixbench-pipe-1 2535689.01 ( 0.00%) 2554662.39 * 0.75%* 2521853.23 * -0.55%*
Hmean unixbench-pipe-512 361385055.25 ( 0.00%) 365752991.35 * 1.21%* 358310503.28 * -0.85%*
Hmean unixbench-spawn-1 4506.26 ( 0.00%) 4566.00 ( 1.33%) 4242.52 * -5.85%*
Hmean unixbench-spawn-512 69380.09 ( 0.00%) 69554.52 ( 0.25%) 69413.14 ( 0.05%)
Hmean unixbench-execl-1 3824.57 ( 0.00%) 3782.82 * -1.09%* 3832.10 ( 0.20%)
Hmean unixbench-execl-512 12288.64 ( 0.00%) 13248.40 ( 7.81%) 12661.78 ( 3.04%)
==================================================================
Test : ycsb-mongodb
Units : Throughput
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
eevdf : 1.00 (var: 1.41%)
shared_runq : 0.98 (var: 0.84%) (diff: -2.40%)
shared_runq_idle_check : 0.97 (var: 0.79%) (diff: -3.06%)
==================================================================
Test : DeathStarBench
Units : %diff, relative to eevdf
Interpretation: Higher is better
Statistic : AMean
==================================================================
pinning scaling eevdf shared_runq shared_runq_idle_check
1CDD 1 0% -0.85% -1.56%
2CDD 2 0% -0.60% -1.22%
4CDD 4 0% 2.87% 0.02%
8CDD 8 0% 0.36% 1.57%
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists