From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] xen: if on Xen, "flatten" the scheduling domain hierarchy
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:24:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55DEE556.3010802@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1439913332.4239.134.camel@citrix.com>
On 08/18/2015 04:55 PM, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> So, as a followup of what we were discussing in this thread:
>
> [Xen-devel] PV-vNUMA issue: topology is misinterpreted by the guest
> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-07/msg03241.html
>
> I started looking in more details at scheduling domains in the Linux
> kernel. Now, that thread was about CPUID and vNUMA, and their weird way
> of interacting, while this thing I'm proposing here is completely
> independent from them both.
>
> In fact, no matter whether vNUMA is supported and enabled, and no matter
> whether CPUID is reporting accurate, random, meaningful or completely
> misleading information, I think that we should do something about how
> scheduling domains are build.
>
> Fact is, unless we use 1:1, and immutable (across all the guest
> lifetime) pinning, scheduling domains should not be constructed, in
> Linux, by looking at *any* topology information, because that just does
> not make any sense, when vcpus move around.
>
> Let me state this again (hoping to make myself as clear as possible): no
> matter in how much good shape we put CPUID support, no matter how
> beautifully and consistently that will interact with both vNUMA,
> licensing requirements and whatever else. It will be always possible for
> vCPU #0 and vCPU #3 to be scheduled on two SMT threads at time t1, and
> on two different NUMA nodes at time t2. Hence, the Linux scheduler
> should really not skew his load balancing logic toward any of those two
> situations, as neither of them could be considered correct (since
> nothing is!).
>
> For now, this only covers the PV case. HVM case shouldn't be any
> different, but I haven't looked at how to make the same thing happen in
> there as well.
>
> OVERALL DESCRIPTION
> ===================
> What this RFC patch does is, in the Xen PV case, configure scheduling
> domains in such a way that there is only one of them, spanning all the
> pCPUs of the guest.
>
> Note that the patch deals directly with scheduling domains, and there is
> no need to alter the masks that will then be used for building and
> reporting the topology (via CPUID, /proc/cpuinfo, /sysfs, etc.). That is
> the main difference between it and the patch proposed by Juergen here:
> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-07/msg05088.html
>
> This means that when, in future, we will fix CPUID handling and make it
> comply with whatever logic or requirements we want, that won't have any
> unexpected side effects on scheduling domains.
>
> Information about how the scheduling domains are being constructed
> during boot are available in `dmesg', if the kernel is booted with the
> 'sched_debug' parameter. It is also possible to look
> at /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/cpu*, and at /proc/schedstat.
>
> With the patch applied, only one scheduling domain is created, called
> the 'VCPU' domain, spanning all the guest's (or Dom0's) vCPUs. You can
> tell that from the fact that every cpu* folder
> in /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/ only have one subdirectory
> ('domain0'), with all the tweaks and the tunables for our scheduling
> domain.
>
> EVALUATION
> ==========
> I've tested this with UnixBench, and by looking at Xen build time, on a
> 16, 24 and 48 pCPUs hosts. I've run the benchmarks in Dom0 only, for
> now, but I plan to re-run them in DomUs soon (Juergen may be doing
> something similar to this in DomU already, AFAUI).
>
> I've run the benchmarks with and without the patch applied ('patched'
> and 'vanilla', respectively, in the tables below), and with different
> number of build jobs (in case of the Xen build) or of parallel copy of
> the benchmarks (in the case of UnixBench).
>
> What I get from the numbers is that the patch almost always brings
> benefits, in some cases even huge ones. There are a couple of cases
> where we regress, but always only slightly so, especially if comparing
> that to the magnitude of some of the improvement that we get.
>
> Bear also in mind that these results are gathered from Dom0, and without
> any overcommitment at the vCPU level (i.e., nr. vCPUs == nr pCPUs). If
> we move things in DomU and do overcommit at the Xen scheduler level, I
> am expecting even better results.
>
> RESULTS
> =======
> To have a quick idea of how a benchmark went, look at the '%
> improvement' row of each table.
>
> I'll put these results online, in a googledoc spreadsheet or something
> like that, to make them easier to read, as soon as possible.
>
> *** Intel(R) Xeon(R) E5620 @ 2.40GHz
> *** pCPUs 16 DOM0 vCPUS 16
> *** RAM 12285 MB DOM0 Memory 9955 MB
> *** NUMA nodes 2
> =======================================================================================================================================
> MAKE XEN (lower == better)
> =======================================================================================================================================
> # of build jobs -j1 -j6 -j8 -j16** -j24
> vanilla/patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 153.72 152.41 35.33 34.93 30.7 30.33 26.79 25.97 26.88 26.21
> 153.81 152.76 35.37 34.99 30.81 30.36 26.83 26.08 27 26.24
> 153.93 152.79 35.37 35.25 30.92 30.39 26.83 26.13 27.01 26.28
> 153.94 152.94 35.39 35.28 31.05 30.43 26.9 26.14 27.01 26.44
> 153.98 153.06 35.45 35.31 31.17 30.5 26.95 26.18 27.02 26.55
> 154.01 153.23 35.5 35.35 31.2 30.59 26.98 26.2 27.05 26.61
> 154.04 153.34 35.56 35.42 31.45 30.76 27.12 26.21 27.06 26.78
> 154.16 153.5 37.79 35.58 31.68 30.83 27.16 26.23 27.16 26.78
> 154.18 153.71 37.98 35.61 33.73 30.9 27.49 26.32 27.16 26.8
> 154.9 154.67 38.03 37.64 34.69 31.69 29.82 26.38 27.2 28.63
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avg. 154.067 153.241 36.177 35.536 31.74 30.678 27.287 26.184 27.055 26.732
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Std. Dev. 0.325 0.631 1.215 0.771 1.352 0.410 0.914 0.116 0.095 0.704
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> % improvement 0.536 1.772 3.346 4.042 1.194
> ========================================================================================================================================
> ====================================================================================================================================================
> UNIXBENCH
> ====================================================================================================================================================
> # parallel copies 1 parallel 6 parrallel 8 parallel 16 parallel** 24 parallel
> vanilla/patched vanilla patched vanilla pached vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dhrystone 2 using register variables 2302.2 2302.1 13157.8 12262.4 15691.5 15860.1 18927.7 19078.5 18654.3 18855.6
> Double-Precision Whetstone 620.2 620.2 3481.2 3566.9 4669.2 4551.5 7610.1 7614.3 11558.9 11561.3
> Execl Throughput 184.3 186.7 884.6 905.3 1168.4 1213.6 2134.6 2210.2 2250.9 2265
> File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 780.8 783.3 1243.7 1255.5 1250.6 1215.7 1080.9 1094.2 1069.8 1062.5
> File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 479.8 482.8 781.8 803.6 806.4 781 682.9 707.7 698.2 694.6
> File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1617.6 1593.5 2739.7 2943.4 2818.3 2957.8 2389.6 2412.6 2371.6 2423.8
> Pipe Throughput 363.9 361.6 2068.6 2065.6 2622 2633.5 4053.3 4085.9 4064.7 4076.7
> Pipe-based Context Switching 70.6 207.2 369.1 1126.8 623.9 1431.3 1970.4 2082.9 1963.8 2077
> Process Creation 103.1 135 503 677.6 618.7 855.4 1138 1113.7 1195.6 1199
> Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 723.2 765.3 4406.4 4334.4 5045.4 5002.5 5861.9 5844.2 5958.8 5916.1
> Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 2243.7 2715.3 5694.7 5663.6 5694.7 5657.8 5637.1 5600.5 5582.9 5543.6
> System Call Overhead 330 330.1 1669.2 1672.4 2028.6 1996.6 2920.5 2947.1 2923.9 2952.5
> System Benchmarks Index Score 496.8 567.5 1861.9 2106 2220.3 2441.3 2972.5 3007.9 3103.4 3125.3
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> % increase (of the Index Score) 14.231 13.110 9.954 1.191 0.706
> ====================================================================================================================================================
>
> *** Intel(R) Xeon(R) X5650 @ 2.67GHz
> *** pCPUs 24 DOM0 vCPUS 16
> *** RAM 36851 MB DOM0 Memory 9955 MB
> *** NUMA nodes 2
> =======================================================================================================================================
> MAKE XEN (lower == better)
> =======================================================================================================================================
> # of build jobs -j1 -j8 -j12 -j24** -j32
> vanilla/patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 119.49 119.47 23.37 23.29 20.12 19.85 17.99 17.9 17.82 17.8
> 119.59 119.64 23.52 23.31 20.16 19.99 18.19 18.05 18.23 17.89
> 119.59 119.65 23.53 23.35 20.19 20.08 18.26 18.09 18.35 17.91
> 119.72 119.75 23.63 23.41 20.2 20.14 18.54 18.1 18.4 17.95
> 119.95 119.86 23.68 23.42 20.24 20.19 18.57 18.15 18.44 18.03
> 119.97 119.9 23.72 23.51 20.38 20.31 18.61 18.21 18.49 18.03
> 119.97 119.91 25.03 23.53 20.38 20.42 18.75 18.28 18.51 18.08
> 120.01 119.98 25.05 23.93 20.39 21.69 19.99 18.49 18.52 18.6
> 120.24 119.99 25.12 24.19 21.67 21.76 20.08 19.74 19.73 19.62
> 120.66 121.22 25.16 25.36 21.94 21.85 20.26 20.3 19.92 19.81
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avg. 119.919 119.937 24.181 23.73 20.567 20.628 18.924 18.531 18.641 18.372
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Std. Dev. 0.351 0.481 0.789 0.642 0.663 0.802 0.851 0.811 0.658 0.741
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> % improvement -0.015 1.865 -0.297 2.077 1.443
> ========================================================================================================================================
> ====================================================================================================================================================
> UNIXBENCH
> ====================================================================================================================================================
> # parallel copies 1 parallel 8 parrallel 12 parallel 24 parallel** 32 parallel
> vanilla/patched vanilla patched vanilla pached vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dhrystone 2 using register variables 2650.1 2664.6 18967.8 19060.4 27534.1 27046.8 30077.9 30110.6 30542.1 30358.7
> Double-Precision Whetstone 713.7 713.5 5463.6 5455.1 7863.9 7923.8 12725.1 12727.8 17474.3 17463.3
> Execl Throughput 280.9 283.8 1724.4 1866.5 2029.5 2367.6 2370 2521.3 2453 2506.8
> File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 891.1 894.2 1423 1457.7 1385.6 1482.2 1226.1 1224.2 1235.9 1265.5
> File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 546.9 555.4 949 972.1 882.8 878.6 821.9 817.7 784.7 810.8
> File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 1743.4 1722.8 3406.5 3438.9 3314.3 3265.9 2801.9 2788.3 2695.2 2781.5
> Pipe Throughput 426.8 423.4 3207.9 3234 4635.1 4708.9 7326 7335.3 7327.2 7319.7
> Pipe-based Context Switching 110.2 223.5 680.8 1602.2 998.6 2324.6 3122.1 3252.7 3128.6 3337.2
> Process Creation 130.7 224.4 1001.3 1043.6 1209 1248.2 1337.9 1380.4 1338.6 1280.1
> Shell Scripts (1 concurrent) 1140.5 1257.5 5462.8 6146.4 6435.3 7206.1 7425.2 7636.2 7566.1 7636.6
> Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 3492 3586.7 7144.9 7307 7258 7320.2 7295.1 7296.7 7248.6 7252.2
> System Call Overhead 387.7 387.5 2398.4 2367 2793.8 2752.7 3735.7 3694.2 3752.1 3709.4
> System Benchmarks Index Score 634.8 712.6 2725.8 3005.7 3232.4 3569.7 3981.3 4028.8 4085.2 4126.3
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> % increase (of the Index Score) 12.256 10.269 10.435 1.193 1.006
> ====================================================================================================================================================
>
> *** Intel(R) Xeon(R) X5650 @ 2.67GHz
> *** pCPUs 48 DOM0 vCPUS 16
> *** RAM 393138 MB DOM0 Memory 9955 MB
> *** NUMA nodes 2
> =======================================================================================================================================
> MAKE XEN (lower == better)
> =======================================================================================================================================
> # of build jobs -j1 -j20 -j24 -j48** -j62
> vanilla/patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched vanilla patched
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 267.78 233.25 36.53 35.53 35.98 34.99 33.46 32.13 33.57 32.54
> 268.42 233.92 36.82 35.56 36.12 35.2 34.24 32.24 33.64 32.56
> 268.85 234.39 36.92 35.75 36.15 35.35 34.48 32.86 33.67 32.74
> 268.98 235.11 36.96 36.01 36.25 35.46 34.73 32.89 33.97 32.83
> 269.03 236.48 37.04 36.16 36.45 35.63 34.77 32.97 34.12 33.01
> 269.54 237.05 40.33 36.59 36.57 36.15 34.97 33.09 34.18 33.52
> 269.99 238.24 40.45 36.78 36.58 36.22 34.99 33.69 34.28 33.63
> 270.11 238.48 41.13 39.98 40.22 36.24 38 33.92 34.35 33.87
> 270.96 239.07 41.66 40.81 40.59 36.35 38.99 34.19 34.49 37.24
> 271.84 240.89 42.07 41.24 40.63 40.06 39.07 36.04 34.69 37.59
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avg. 269.55 236.688 38.991 37.441 37.554 36.165 35.77 33.402 34.096 33.953
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Std. Dev. 1.213 2.503 2.312 2.288 2.031 1.452 2.079 1.142 0.379 1.882
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> % improvement 12.191 3.975 3.699 6.620 0.419
> ========================================================================================================================================
I'm a bit confused here as to why, if dom0 has 16 vcpus in all of your
tests, you change the -j number (apparently) based on the number of
pcpus available to Xen. Wouldn't it make more sense to stick with
1/6/8/16/24? That would allow us to have actually comparable numbers.
But in any case, it seems to me that the numbers do show a uniform
improvement and no regressions -- I think this approach looks really
good, particularly as it is so small and well-contained.
-George
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-27 10:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-18 15:55 [PATCH RFC] xen: if on Xen, "flatten" the scheduling domain hierarchy Dario Faggioli
2015-08-18 16:53 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-08-20 18:16 ` Juergen Groß
2015-08-31 16:12 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-09-02 11:58 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-02 14:08 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-09-02 14:30 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-15 17:16 ` [Xen-devel] " Dario Faggioli
2015-09-15 16:50 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-21 5:49 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-22 4:42 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-22 16:22 ` George Dunlap
2015-09-23 4:36 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23 8:30 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-23 9:44 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23 10:23 ` George Dunlap
2015-09-23 7:24 ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-23 7:35 ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23 12:25 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-08-27 10:24 ` George Dunlap [this message]
2015-08-27 17:05 ` George Dunlap
2015-09-15 14:32 ` Dario Faggioli
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=55DEE556.3010802@citrix.com \
--to=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.