All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
@ 2011-11-15 11:34 Gleb Natapov
  2011-11-15 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-11-15 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar

Currently pmu is disabled and re-enabled on each timer interrupt even
when no rotation or frequency adjustment is needed. On Intel CPU this
results in two writes into PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL MSR per tick. On bare metal
it does not cause significant slowdown, but when running perf in a virtual
machine it leads to 20% slowdown on my machine.

Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index bdcd413..83c87d8 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -2317,7 +2317,7 @@ static void perf_adjust_period(struct perf_event *event, u64 nsec, u64 count)
 	}
 }
 
-static void perf_ctx_adjust_freq(struct perf_event_context *ctx, u64 period)
+static bool perf_ctx_adjust_freq(struct perf_event_context *ctx, u64 period, bool pmu_disabled)
 {
 	struct perf_event *event;
 	struct hw_perf_event *hwc;
@@ -2347,6 +2347,11 @@ static void perf_ctx_adjust_freq(struct perf_event_context *ctx, u64 period)
 		if (!event->attr.freq || !event->attr.sample_freq)
 			continue;
 
+		if (!pmu_disabled) {
+			perf_pmu_disable(ctx->pmu);
+			pmu_disabled = true;
+		}
+
 		event->pmu->read(event);
 		now = local64_read(&event->count);
 		delta = now - hwc->freq_count_stamp;
@@ -2355,6 +2360,8 @@ static void perf_ctx_adjust_freq(struct perf_event_context *ctx, u64 period)
 		if (delta > 0)
 			perf_adjust_period(event, period, delta);
 	}
+
+	return pmu_disabled;
 }
 
 /*
@@ -2380,6 +2387,7 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
 	u64 interval = (u64)cpuctx->jiffies_interval * TICK_NSEC;
 	struct perf_event_context *ctx = NULL;
 	int rotate = 0, remove = 1;
+	bool pmu_disabled = false;
 
 	if (cpuctx->ctx.nr_events) {
 		remove = 0;
@@ -2395,10 +2403,9 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
 	}
 
 	perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
-	perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
-	perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval);
+	pmu_disabled = perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval, pmu_disabled);
 	if (ctx)
-		perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval);
+		pmu_disabled = perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval, pmu_disabled);
 
 	if (!rotate)
 		goto done;
@@ -2417,7 +2424,8 @@ done:
 	if (remove)
 		list_del_init(&cpuctx->rotation_list);
 
-	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
+	if (pmu_disabled)
+		perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
 	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
 }
 
--
			Gleb.

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
  2011-11-15 11:34 [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-11-15 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
  2011-11-15 12:38   ` Gleb Natapov
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2011-11-15 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gleb Natapov; +Cc: linux-kernel, Ingo Molnar

On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 13:34 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> 
> Currently pmu is disabled and re-enabled on each timer interrupt even
> when no rotation or frequency adjustment is needed. On Intel CPU this
> results in two writes into PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL MSR per tick. On bare metal
> it does not cause significant slowdown, but when running perf in a virtual
> machine it leads to 20% slowdown on my machine.


I detest asymmetric locking like that, does something like the below
also work for you?

---
 include/linux/perf_event.h |    1 +
 kernel/events/core.c       |   30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index 1e9ebe5..92773aa 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -889,6 +889,7 @@ struct perf_event_context {
 	int				nr_active;
 	int				is_active;
 	int				nr_stat;
+	int				nr_freq;
 	int				rotate_disable;
 	atomic_t			refcount;
 	struct task_struct		*task;
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 7f693e9..d8f2f38 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -1127,6 +1127,8 @@ event_sched_out(struct perf_event *event,
 	if (!is_software_event(event))
 		cpuctx->active_oncpu--;
 	ctx->nr_active--;
+	if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq)
+		ctx->nr_freq--;
 	if (event->attr.exclusive || !cpuctx->active_oncpu)
 		cpuctx->exclusive = 0;
 }
@@ -1403,6 +1405,8 @@ event_sched_in(struct perf_event *event,
 	if (!is_software_event(event))
 		cpuctx->active_oncpu++;
 	ctx->nr_active++;
+	if (event->attr.freq && event->attr.sample_freq)
+		ctx->nr_freq++;
 
 	if (event->attr.exclusive)
 		cpuctx->exclusive = 1;
@@ -2324,6 +2328,9 @@ static void perf_ctx_adjust_freq(struct perf_event_context *ctx, u64 period)
 	u64 interrupts, now;
 	s64 delta;
 
+	if (!ctx->nr_freq)
+		return;
+
 	list_for_each_entry_rcu(event, &ctx->event_list, event_entry) {
 		if (event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE)
 			continue;
@@ -2379,12 +2386,14 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
 {
 	u64 interval = (u64)cpuctx->jiffies_interval * TICK_NSEC;
 	struct perf_event_context *ctx = NULL;
-	int rotate = 0, remove = 1;
+	int rotate = 0, remove = 1, freq = 0;
 
 	if (cpuctx->ctx.nr_events) {
 		remove = 0;
 		if (cpuctx->ctx.nr_events != cpuctx->ctx.nr_active)
 			rotate = 1;
+		if (cpuctx->ctx.nr_freq)
+			freq = 1;
 	}
 
 	ctx = cpuctx->task_ctx;
@@ -2392,16 +2401,26 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
 		remove = 0;
 		if (ctx->nr_events != ctx->nr_active)
 			rotate = 1;
+		if (ctx->nr_freq)
+			freq = 1;
 	}
 
+	if (!rotate && !freq)
+		goto done;
+
 	perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
 	perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
+
+	if (!freq)
+		goto rotate;
+
 	perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval);
 	if (ctx)
 		perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval);
 
+rotate:
 	if (!rotate)
-		goto done;
+		goto unlock;
 
 	cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_FLEXIBLE);
 	if (ctx)
@@ -2413,12 +2432,13 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
 
 	perf_event_sched_in(cpuctx, ctx, current);
 
+unlock:
+	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
+	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
+
 done:
 	if (remove)
 		list_del_init(&cpuctx->rotation_list);
-
-	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
-	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
 }
 
 void perf_event_task_tick(void)


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
  2011-11-15 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
@ 2011-11-15 12:38   ` Gleb Natapov
  2011-11-15 12:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-11-15 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Zijlstra; +Cc: linux-kernel, Ingo Molnar

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 01:07:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 13:34 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > 
> > Currently pmu is disabled and re-enabled on each timer interrupt even
> > when no rotation or frequency adjustment is needed. On Intel CPU this
> > results in two writes into PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL MSR per tick. On bare metal
> > it does not cause significant slowdown, but when running perf in a virtual
> > machine it leads to 20% slowdown on my machine.
> 
> 
> I detest asymmetric locking like that, does something like the below
> also work for you?
> 
It does.

>  
> +	if (!rotate && !freq)
> +		goto done;
> +
>  	perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>  	perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
> +
> +	if (!freq)
> +		goto rotate;
> +
Why goto, why not

	if (freq) {
>  	perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval);
>  	if (ctx)
>  		perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval);
        }

And the same with next goto.

>  
> +rotate:
>  	if (!rotate)
> -		goto done;
> +		goto unlock;
>  
>  	cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_FLEXIBLE);
>  	if (ctx)
> @@ -2413,12 +2432,13 @@ static void perf_rotate_context(struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx)
>  
>  	perf_event_sched_in(cpuctx, ctx, current);
>  
> +unlock:
> +	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
> +	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
> +
>  done:
>  	if (remove)
>  		list_del_init(&cpuctx->rotation_list);
> -
> -	perf_pmu_enable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
> -	perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>  }
>  
>  void perf_event_task_tick(void)

--
			Gleb.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
  2011-11-15 12:38   ` Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-11-15 12:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
  2011-11-22 10:56       ` Gleb Natapov
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2011-11-15 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gleb Natapov; +Cc: linux-kernel, Ingo Molnar

On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 14:38 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 01:07:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 13:34 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > 
> > > Currently pmu is disabled and re-enabled on each timer interrupt even
> > > when no rotation or frequency adjustment is needed. On Intel CPU this
> > > results in two writes into PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL MSR per tick. On bare metal
> > > it does not cause significant slowdown, but when running perf in a virtual
> > > machine it leads to 20% slowdown on my machine.
> > 
> > 
> > I detest asymmetric locking like that, does something like the below
> > also work for you?
> > 
> It does.

ok, great.

> >  
> > +	if (!rotate && !freq)
> > +		goto done;
> > +
> >  	perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
> >  	perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
> > +
> > +	if (!freq)
> > +		goto rotate;
> > +
> Why goto, why not
> 
> 	if (freq) {
> >  	perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval);
> >  	if (ctx)
> >  		perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval);
>         }
> 
> And the same with next goto.

Because, uhm,. dunno. Let me make that if()s and commit the thing.
Thanks!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
  2011-11-15 12:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
@ 2011-11-22 10:56       ` Gleb Natapov
  2011-11-22 10:59         ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-11-22 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Peter Zijlstra; +Cc: linux-kernel, Ingo Molnar

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 01:55:18PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 14:38 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 01:07:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 13:34 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Currently pmu is disabled and re-enabled on each timer interrupt even
> > > > when no rotation or frequency adjustment is needed. On Intel CPU this
> > > > results in two writes into PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL MSR per tick. On bare metal
> > > > it does not cause significant slowdown, but when running perf in a virtual
> > > > machine it leads to 20% slowdown on my machine.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I detest asymmetric locking like that, does something like the below
> > > also work for you?
> > > 
> > It does.
> 
> ok, great.
> 
> > >  
> > > +	if (!rotate && !freq)
> > > +		goto done;
> > > +
> > >  	perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
> > >  	perf_pmu_disable(cpuctx->ctx.pmu);
> > > +
> > > +	if (!freq)
> > > +		goto rotate;
> > > +
> > Why goto, why not
> > 
> > 	if (freq) {
> > >  	perf_ctx_adjust_freq(&cpuctx->ctx, interval);
> > >  	if (ctx)
> > >  		perf_ctx_adjust_freq(ctx, interval);
> >         }
> > 
> > And the same with next goto.
> 
> Because, uhm,. dunno. Let me make that if()s and commit the thing.
> Thanks!
Have you committed it somewhere? I do not see it in tip.git, but may be
I am looking in a wrong place.

--
			Gleb.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed
  2011-11-22 10:56       ` Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-11-22 10:59         ` Peter Zijlstra
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2011-11-22 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gleb Natapov; +Cc: linux-kernel, Ingo Molnar

On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 12:56 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Have you committed it somewhere? I do not see it in tip.git, but may be
> I am looking in a wrong place. 

Its still in my queue, I guess I should poke mingo again to pick up.
Also, I really ought to get my k.org account back up and write a script
to push this queue of mine into a git tree for ease of use.

For now you can have a peek at it through:

http://programming.kicks-ass.net/sekrit/patches.tar.bz2



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-11-22 11:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-11-15 11:34 [PATCH RFC] perf, core: disable pmu while context rotation only if needed Gleb Natapov
2011-11-15 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-15 12:38   ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-15 12:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-22 10:56       ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-22 10:59         ` Peter Zijlstra

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.