All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: vernux@us.ibm.com, andi@firstfloor.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Patrick Mullaney <pmullaney@novell.com>
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:54:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49C16D7C.3080003@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090318.143844.173112261.davem@davemloft.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1964 bytes --]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Vernon Mauery <vernux@us.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:10:33 -0700
>
>   
>> David Miller wrote:
>>     
>>> From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:54:37 +0100
>>>
>>>       
>>>> But then again I'm not sure it's  worth it if the problem only
>>>> happens in out of tree RT.
>>>>         
>>> The list of problems that only show up with the RT kernel seems to be
>>> constantly increasing, but honestly is very surprising to me.
>>> I don't understand why we even need to be concerned about this stuff
>>> upstream, to be honest.
>>> Please reproduce this in the vanilla kernel, then get back to us.
>>>       
>> Huh? The numbers that I posted *were* from the vanilla kernel. I ran
>> the 2.6.29-rc8 kernel with lock_stat enabled.  The lock contention
>> happens on the same lock in both vanilla and -rt, it just happens
>> to be more pronounced in the -rt kernel because of the double context
>> switches that the sleeping spinlock/rt-mutexes introduce.
>>     
>
> And the double context switches are probably also why less
> natural batching and locality are achieved in the RT kernel.
>
> Isn't that true?
>   

Note that -rt doesnt typically context-switch under contention anymore
since we introduced adaptive-locks.  Also note that the contention
against the lock is still contention, regardless of whether you have -rt
or not.  Its just that the slow-path to handle the contended case for
-rt is more expensive than mainline.  However, once you have the
contention as stated, you have already lost.

We have observed the posters findings ourselves in both mainline and
-rt.  I.e. That lock doesnt scale very well once you have more than a
handful of cores.  It's certainly a great area to look at for improving
the overall stack, IMO, as I believe there is quite a bit of headroom
left to be recovered that is buried there.

Regards,
-Greg


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-03-18 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-18 17:24 High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 19:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-18 20:17   ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-20 23:29     ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-23  8:32       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23  8:32         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23  8:37         ` David Miller
2009-03-23  8:50           ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-04-02 14:13           ` Herbert Xu
2009-04-02 14:15             ` Herbert Xu
2009-03-18 20:54 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 21:03   ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:10     ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:38       ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:49         ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-19  1:02           ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:54         ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2009-03-19  1:03           ` David Miller
2009-03-19  1:13             ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19  1:17               ` David Miller
2009-03-19  1:43                 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19  1:54                   ` David Miller
2009-03-19  5:49                     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19  5:49                       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19  5:58                       ` David Miller
2009-03-19 14:04                         ` [PATCH] net: reorder struct Qdisc for better SMP performance Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19 14:04                           ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-20  8:33                           ` David Miller
2009-03-19 13:45                   ` High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Andi Kleen
2009-03-19  3:48             ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19  5:38               ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:42                 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 20:52                   ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:50             ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19  7:15           ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-18 21:07   ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:45     ` Eilon Greenstein
2009-03-18 21:51       ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:59         ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 22:19           ` Rick Jones
2009-03-19 12:59   ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:36     ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:46     ` Andi Kleen

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=49C16D7C.3080003@novell.com \
    --to=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pmullaney@novell.com \
    --cc=vernux@us.ibm.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.