From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] Make x86 calibrate_delay run in parallel.
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:30:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D9457BF.1040601@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110331095705.GA23319@elte.hu>
On 03/31/2011 11:57 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > I am not trying to be argumentative. I never got an understanding of
> > what was going wrong with that earlier patch and am hoping for some
> > understanding now.
>
> Well, if calibrate_delay() calls run in parallel then different hyperthreads
> will impact each other.
It's different but not more wrong. If delay() later runs on a thread
whose sibling is busy, it will in fact give more accurate results.
> > Why does it spectacularly miscalibrate? Can anything be done to correct
> > that miscalibration? Doesn't this patch indicate another problem with
> > the calibration for hotplug cpus? Isn't there already a problem if
> > you boot a cpu normally, then hot-remove a hyperthread of a cpu, run a
> > userland task which fully loads up all the cores on that socket, then
> > hot-add that hyperthread back in? If the lpj value is that volatile,
> > what value does it really have?
>
> The typical CPU hotplug usecase is suspend/resume, where we bring down the CPUs
> in a more or less controlled manner.
>
> Yes, you could achieve something similar by frobbing /sys/*/*/online but that's
> a big difference to *always* running the calibration loops in parallel.
>
> I'd argue for the opposite direction: only calibrate a physical CPU once per
> CPU per bootup - this would also make CPU hotplug faster btw.
>
> ( Virtual CPUs (KVM, etc.) need a recalibration per bringup, because the new
> CPU could be running on different hardware - but that's a detail: 4096 UV
> CPUs are not in this category. )
Virtual cpus change their performance dynamically due to overcommit,
live migration, the host scheduler rearranging them, etc.
> Really, there's no good reason why every CPU should be calibrated on a system
> running identical CPUs, right? Mixed-frequency systems are rather elusive on
> x86.
Good point. And udelay() users are probably not sensitive to accuracy
anyway (which changes with load and thermal conditions).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-31 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-15 1:58 [RFC 0/2] Speed large x86_64 system boot by calling calibrate_delay() in parallel Robin, Holt <holt
2010-12-15 1:58 ` [RFC 1/2] Pass loops_per_jiffy in and out of calibrate_delay() Robin, Holt <holt
2010-12-15 1:58 ` [RFC 2/2] Make x86 calibrate_delay run in parallel Robin, Holt <holt
2010-12-16 8:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-03-31 4:46 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-31 6:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-31 6:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-31 9:37 ` Robin Holt
2011-03-31 9:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-31 10:30 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2011-03-31 10:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-31 10:49 ` Avi Kivity
2011-03-31 11:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-31 11:50 ` Robin Holt
2011-03-31 9:29 ` Robin Holt
2011-03-31 14:25 ` Yinghai Lu
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=4D9457BF.1040601@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.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.