From: Roman Kagan <rkagan@virtuozzo.com>
To: "Longpeng (Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com>
Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
"Denis V. Lunev" <den@virtuozzo.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Denis Plotnikov <dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Gonglei <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>,
huangpeng <peter.huangpeng@huawei.com>,
zhaoshenglong <zhaoshenglong@huawei.com>,
herongguang.he@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] i386: turn off l3-cache property by default
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:01:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171129060149.GD2374@rkaganip.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5A1E43A6.1010607@huawei.com>
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:20:38PM +0800, Longpeng (Mike) wrote:
> On 2017/11/29 5:13, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>
> > [CCing the people who were copied in the original patch that
> > enabled l3cache]
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:20:27PM +0300, Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> >> On 11/28/2017 10:58 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 04:26:50PM +0300, Denis Plotnikov wrote:
> >>>> Commit 14c985cffa "target-i386: present virtual L3 cache info for vcpus"
> >>>> introduced and set by default exposing l3 to the guest.
> >>>>
> >>>> The motivation behind it was that in the Linux scheduler, when waking up
> >>>> a task on a sibling CPU, the task was put onto the target CPU's runqueue
> >>>> directly, without sending a reschedule IPI. Reduction in the IPI count
> >>>> led to performance gain.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, this isn't the whole story. Once the task is on the target
> >>>> CPU's runqueue, it may have to preempt the current task on that CPU, be
> >>>> it the idle task putting the CPU to sleep or just another running task.
> >>>> For that a reschedule IPI will have to be issued, too. Only when that
> >>>> other CPU is running a normal task for too little time, the fairness
> >>>> constraints will prevent the preemption and thus the IPI.
> >>>>
>
> Agree. :)
>
> Our testing VM is Suse11 guest with idle=poll at that time and now I realize
^^^^^^^^^
Oh, that's a whole lot of a difference! I wish you mentioned that in
that patch.
> that Suse11 has a BUG in its scheduler.
>
> For REHL 7.3 or upstream kernel, in ttwu_queue_remote(), a RES IPI is issued if
> rq->idle is not polling:
> '''
> static void ttwu_queue_remote(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
> {
> struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
>
> if (llist_add(&p->wake_entry, &cpu_rq(cpu)->wake_list)) {
> if (!set_nr_if_polling(rq->idle))
> smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
> else
> trace_sched_wake_idle_without_ipi(cpu);
> }
> }
> '''
>
> But for Suse11, it does not check, it send a RES IPI unconditionally.
>
> >>>> This boils down to the improvement being only achievable in workloads
> >>>> with many actively switching tasks. We had no access to the
> >>>> (proprietary?) SAP HANA benchmark the commit referred to, but the
> >>>> pattern is also reproduced with "perf bench sched messaging -g 1"
> >>>> on 1 socket, 8 cores vCPU topology, we see indeed:
> >>>>
> >>>> l3-cache #res IPI /s #time / 10000 loops
> >>>> off 560K 1.8 sec
> >>>> on 40K 0.9 sec
> >>>>
> >>>> Now there's a downside: with L3 cache the Linux scheduler is more eager
> >>>> to wake up tasks on sibling CPUs, resulting in unnecessary cross-vCPU
> >>>> interactions and therefore exessive halts and IPIs. E.g. "perf bench
> >>>> sched pipe -i 100000" gives
> >>>>
> >>>> l3-cache #res IPI /s #HLT /s #time /100000 loops
> >>>> off 200 (no K) 230 0.2 sec
> >>>> on 400K 330K 0.5 sec
> >>>>
>
> I guess this issue could be resolved by disable the SD_WAKE_AFFINE.
But that requires extra tuning in the guest which is even less likely to
happen in the cloud case when VM admin != host admin.
> As Gonglei said:
> 1. the L3 cache relates to the user experience.
> 2. the glibc would get the cache info by CPUID directly, and relates to the
> memory performance.
>
> What's more, the L3 cache relates to the sched_domain which is important to the
> (load) balancer when system is busy.
>
> All this doesn't mean the patch is insignificant, I just think we should do more
> research before decide. I'll do some tests, thanks. :)
Looking forward to it, thanks!
Roman.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-29 6:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-24 13:26 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] i386: turn off l3-cache property by default Denis Plotnikov
2017-11-28 18:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-11-28 19:50 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-11-28 20:05 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-29 4:56 ` Roman Kagan
2017-11-28 19:58 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-28 20:20 ` Denis V. Lunev
2017-11-28 21:13 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-29 1:57 ` Gonglei (Arei)
2017-11-29 5:55 ` rkagan
2017-11-29 6:01 ` Gonglei (Arei)
2017-11-29 5:20 ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-11-29 6:01 ` Roman Kagan [this message]
2017-11-29 7:38 ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-11-29 10:41 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-29 11:58 ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-11-29 13:35 ` Roman Kagan
2017-11-29 17:09 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-29 17:15 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-11-30 6:28 ` Roman Kagan
2017-11-30 9:26 ` Longpeng (Mike)
2017-11-29 5:46 ` Roman Kagan
2017-11-29 10:25 ` Eduardo Habkost
2017-11-29 4:17 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-11-29 6:25 ` Roman Kagan
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=20171129060149.GD2374@rkaganip.lan \
--to=rkagan@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=arei.gonglei@huawei.com \
--cc=den@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=dplotnikov@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=herongguang.he@huawei.com \
--cc=longpeng2@huawei.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.huangpeng@huawei.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=zhaoshenglong@huawei.com \
/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.