From: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>,
Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
"JBeulich@suse.com" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Intel Cache Monitoring: Current Status and Future Opportunities
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 13:59:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150408055916.GF3404@pengc-linux.bj.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1428412199.5671.94.camel@citrix.com>
> > "max_rmid" is a per-socket property. There is no requirement for it to
> > be the same for each socket in a system, although it is likely, given a
> > homogeneous system.
> >
> I know. Again this was not mentioned for document length reasons, but I
> planned to ask about this (as I've done that already this morning, as
> you can see. :-D).
>
> In this case, though, it probably was something worth being mentioned,
> so I will if there will ever be a v2 of the document. :-)
>
> Mostly, I was curious to learn why that is not reflected in the current
> implementation, i.e., whether there are any reasons why we should not
> take advantage of per-socketness of RMIDs, as reported by SDM, as that
> can greatly help mitigating RMID shortage in the per-CPU/core/socket
> configuration (in general, actually, but it's per-cpu that I'm
> interested in).
Andrew is right, RMID is a per-socket property. One reason it's not used
in current implementation, I think, is the fact that max_rmid is
normally the same among sockets, though they can be different in theory.
So the same RMID is targeted for all the sockets. But per-socketness of
RMIDs can be used anyway.
We do take this into account for CAT.
> > As far as MSRs themselves go, an extra MSR write in the context switch
> > path is likely to pale into the noise. However, querying the data is an
> > indirect MSR read (write to the event select MSR, read from the data
> > MSR). Furthermore there is no way to atomically read all data at once
> > which means that activity on other cores can interleave with
> > back-to-back reads in the scheduler.
> >
> All true. And in fact, how and how frequent data should be gathered
> remains to be decided (as said in the document). I was thinking more to
> some periodic sampling, rather than to throw handfuls of rdmsr/wrmsr
> against the code that makes scheduling decisions! :-D
Due to current hardware limitations and in the case of scheduling improvement,
periodic sampling sounds a feasible direction to me.
Chao
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-08 5:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-04 2:14 [RFC PATCH 0/7] Intel Cache Monitoring: Current Status and Future Opportunities Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:14 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86: improve psr scheduling code Dario Faggioli
2015-04-06 13:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-04-04 2:14 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] Xen: x86: print max usable RMID during init Dario Faggioli
2015-04-06 13:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-04-07 10:11 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:14 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] xen: psr: reserve an RMID for each core Dario Faggioli
2015-04-06 13:59 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-04-07 10:19 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-07 13:57 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-04-07 8:24 ` Chao Peng
2015-04-07 10:07 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-08 13:28 ` George Dunlap
2015-04-08 14:03 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:14 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] xen: libxc: libxl: report per-CPU cache occupancy up to libxl Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:14 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] xen: libxc: libxl: allow for attaching and detaching a CPU to CMT Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] xl: report per-CPU cache occupancy up to libxl Dario Faggioli
2015-04-04 2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] xl: allow for attaching and detaching a CPU to CMT Dario Faggioli
2015-04-07 8:19 ` [RFC PATCH 0/7] Intel Cache Monitoring: Current Status and Future Opportunities Chao Peng
2015-04-07 9:51 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-07 10:27 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-04-07 13:10 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-08 5:59 ` Chao Peng [this message]
2015-04-08 8:23 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-08 8:53 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-04-08 8:55 ` Chao Peng
2015-04-09 15:44 ` Meng Xu
2015-04-08 11:27 ` George Dunlap
2015-04-08 13:29 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-08 11:30 ` George Dunlap
2015-04-08 13:16 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-04-09 15:37 ` Meng Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150408055916.GF3404@pengc-linux.bj.intel.com \
--to=chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.