From: "Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@hp.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@suse.de, dgc@sgi.com
Subject: Re: IO CPU affinity test results
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:41:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47DA8078.7060804@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080314130545.GO17940@kernel.dk>
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14 2008, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> I think that is encouraging, for such a small setup. The make results
>> are particularly nice. The hangs are a bother, I have no good ideas on
>> why the occur. The fact that it happens on both archs indicates that
>> this is perhaps a generic problem, which is good. The code to support
>> this is relatively simple, so it should be possible to go over it with a
>> fine toothed comb and see if anything shows up.
>>
>> You didn't get any watchdog triggers on the serial console, or anything
>> like that?
>
> Here's something that may explain it - if interrupts aren't disabled
> when generic_smp_call_function_single() is called, we could deadlock
> on the dst->lock. I think that the IPI invoke will have interrupt
> disabled, but I'm not 100% certain.
>
> Can you see if this passes the muster?
>
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
> index 852abd3..65808df 100644
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -24,12 +24,13 @@ void __cpuinit generic_init_call_single_data(void)
> void generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(void)
> {
> struct call_single_queue *q;
> + unsigned long flags;
> LIST_HEAD(list);
>
> q = &__get_cpu_var(call_single_queue);
> - spin_lock(&q->lock);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&q->lock);
> list_replace_init(&q->list, &list);
> - spin_unlock(&q->lock);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&q->lock);
>
> while (!list_empty(&list)) {
> struct call_single_data *data;
>
Well, putting in these two small patches (/always/ invoke send_IPI_single + this one, modified to include flags on the two spin calls), things look better after two runs (without profiling enabled), this was done on the 4-way ia64 box:
Part RQ MIN AVG MAX Dev
----- -- ------ ------ ------ ------
mkfs 0 18.151 18.311 18.472 0.227
mkfs 1 18.420 18.456 18.492 0.051
untar 0 18.260 18.420 18.581 0.228
untar 1 18.594 19.477 20.360 1.249
make 0 23.730 24.149 24.567 0.592
make 1 23.401 23.599 23.797 0.280
comb 0 60.141 60.881 61.620 1.046
comb 1 60.810 61.532 62.253 1.020
psys 0 4.16% 4.17% 4.18% 0.011
psys 1 3.80% 3.93% 4.06% 0.180
Will do a longer set of runs and report out on that. As you had noticed earlier Jens, the make results look good...
Alan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-14 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-14 12:14 IO CPU affinity test results Alan D. Brunelle
2008-03-14 12:23 ` Alan D. Brunelle
2008-03-14 12:37 ` Jens Axboe
2008-03-14 12:36 ` Jens Axboe
2008-03-14 13:05 ` Jens Axboe
2008-03-14 13:41 ` Alan D. Brunelle [this message]
2008-03-14 15:55 ` Alan D. Brunelle
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=47DA8078.7060804@hp.com \
--to=alan.brunelle@hp.com \
--cc=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/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.