From: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
To: "lkml, " <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sdietrich@novell.com>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@novell.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: RFC: Ideal Adaptive Spinning Conditions
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:21:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB3D90C.3030108@us.ibm.com> (raw)
I'm looking at some adaptive spinning with futexes as a way to help
reduce the dependence on sched_yield() to implement userspace spinlocks.
Chris, I included you in the CC after reading your comments regarding
sched_yield() at kernel summit and I thought you might be interested.
I have an experimental patchset that implements FUTEX_LOCK and
FUTEX_LOCK_ADAPTIVE in the kernel and use something akin to
mutex_spin_on_owner() for the first waiter to spin. What I'm finding is
that adaptive spinning actually hurts my particular test case, so I was
hoping to poll people for context regarding the existing adaptive
spinning implementations in the kernel as to where we see benefit. Under
which conditions does adaptive spinning help?
I presume locks with a short average hold time stand to gain the most as
the longer the lock is held the more likely the spinner will expire its
timeslice or that the scheduling gain becomes noise in the acquisition
time. My test case simple calls "lock();unlock()" for a fixed number of
iterations and reports the iterations per second at the end of the run.
It can run with an arbitrary number of threads as well. I typically run
with 256 threads for 10M iterations.
futex_lock: Result: 635 Kiter/s
futex_lock_adaptive: Result: 542 Kiter/s
I've limited the number of spinners to 1 but feel that perhaps this
should be configurable as locks with very short hold times could benefit
from up to NR_CPUS-1 spinners.
I'd really appreciate any data, just general insight, you may have
acquired while implementing adaptive spinning for rt-mutexes and
mutexes. Open questions for me regarding conditions where adaptive
spinning helps are:
o What type of lock hold times do we expect to benefit?
o How much contention is a good match for adaptive spinning?
- this is related to the number of threads to run in the test
o How many spinners should be allowed?
I can share the kernel patches if people are interested, but they are
really early, and I'm not sure they are of much value until I better
understand the conditions where this is expected to be useful.
Thanks,
--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team
next reply other threads:[~2010-03-31 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-31 23:21 Darren Hart [this message]
2010-03-31 23:35 ` RFC: Ideal Adaptive Spinning Conditions Roland Dreier
2010-04-01 2:03 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 17:02 ` Chris Wright
2010-03-31 23:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-01 0:17 ` Peter W. Morreale
2010-04-01 2:25 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-03 18:00 ` john cooper
2010-04-05 14:06 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-03 17:51 ` john cooper
2010-04-01 2:13 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 2:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-01 5:15 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 12:46 ` Gregory Haskins
2010-04-04 1:50 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-04 15:06 ` Peter W. Morreale
2010-04-05 14:10 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 2:10 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 14:04 ` Chris Mason
2010-04-01 14:20 ` Avi Kivity
2010-04-01 15:54 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 16:10 ` Avi Kivity
2010-04-01 17:10 ` Darren Hart
2010-04-01 17:15 ` Avi Kivity
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=4BB3D90C.3030108@us.ibm.com \
--to=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmorreale@novell.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sdietrich@novell.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.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.