From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, dmatlack@google.com, andrew.jones@linux.dev,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] KVM: selftests: Run dirty_log_perf_test on specific CPUs
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:22:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0RG2w9cHn01Af41@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHVum0ehcP_tn_7g5RP6HAd8cr50DfHO2H+i_UnjyKE8NJrn7Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 07, 2022, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 10:39 AM Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 5:14 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 12:50 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + cpu_set_t cpuset;
> > > > > > + int err;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + CPU_ZERO(&cpuset);
> > > > > > + CPU_SET(pcpu, &cpuset);
> > > > >
> > > > > To save user pain:
> > > > >
> > > > > r = sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(allowed_mask), &allowed_mask);
> > > > > TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_getaffinity failed, errno = %d (%s)", errno,
> > > > > strerror(errno));
> > > > >
> > > > > TEST_ASSERT(CPU_ISSET(pcpu, &allowed_mask),
> > > > > "Task '%d' not allowed to run on pCPU '%d'\n");
> > > > >
> > > > > CPU_ZERO(&allowed_mask);
> > > > > CPU_SET(cpu, &allowed_mask);
> > > > >
> > > > > that way the user will get an explicit error message if they try to pin a vCPU/task
> > > > > that has already been affined by something else. And then, in theory,
> > > > > sched_setaffinity() should never fail.
> > > > >
> > > > > Or you could have two cpu_set_t objects and use CPU_AND(), but that seems
> > > > > unnecessarily complex.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > sched_setaffinity() doesn't fail when we assign more than one task to
> > > > the pCPU, it allows multiple tasks to be on the same pCPU. One of the
> > > > reasons it fails is if it is provided a cpu number which is bigger
> > > > than what is actually available on the host.
> > > >
> > > > I am not convinced that pinning vCPUs to the same pCPU should throw an
> > > > error. We should allow if someone wants to try and compare performance
> > > > by over subscribing or any valid combination they want to test.
> > >
> > > Oh, I'm not talking about the user pinning multiple vCPUs to the same pCPU via
> > > the test, I'm talking about the user, or more likely something in the users's
> > > environment, restricting what pCPUs the user's tasks are allowed on. E.g. if
> > > the test is run in shell that has been restricted to CPU8 via cgroups, then
> > > sched_setaffinity() will fail if the user tries to pin vCPUs to any other CPU.
> >
> > I see, I will add this validation.
>
> I think we should drop this check. Current logic is that the new
> function perf_test_setup_pinning() parses the vcpu mappings, stores
> them in perf_test_vcpu_args{} struct and moves the main thread to the
> provided pcpu. But this causes TEST_ASSERT(CPU_ISSET...) to fail for
> vcpu threads when they are created because they inherit task affinity
> from the main thread which has the pcpu set during setup.
>
> However, this affinity is not strict, so, if TEST_ASSERT(CPU_ISSET...)
> is removed then vcpu threads successfully move to their required pcpu
> via sched_setaffinity() even though the main thread has different
> affinity. If cpus are restricted via cgroups then sched_setaffinity()
> fails as expected no matter what.
>
> Another option will be to split the API, perf_test_setup_pinning()
> will return the main thread pcpu and dirty_log_perf_test can call
> pin_this_task_to_cpu() with the returned pcpu after vcpus have been
> started. I do not like this approach, I also think
> TEST_ASSERT(CPU_ISSET...) is not reducing user pain that much because
> users can still figure out with returned errno what is happening.
The easy way to handle this is to take the sched_getaffinity() snapshot during
perf_test_setup_pinning(). You could even do the sanity checking there, e.g.
keep pcpu_num() (maybe rename it to parse_pcpu()?)
static uint32_t parse_pcpu(const char *cpu_str, cpu_set_t *allowed_mask)
{
uint32_t pcpu = atoi_positive(cpu_str);
TEST_ASSERT(CPU_ISSET(pcpu, &allowed_mask),
"Not allowed to run on pCPU '%d', check cgroups?\n");
return pcpu;
}
r = sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(allowed_mask), &allowed_mask);
TEST_ASSERT(!r, "sched_getaffinity() failed");
for (i = 0; i < nr_vcpus; i++ {
TEST_ASSERT(cpu, "pCPU not provided for vCPU%d\n", i);
perf_test_args.vcpu_args[i++].pcpu = parse_pcpu(cpu, &allowed_mask);
cpu = strtok(NULL, delim);
}
if (cpu)
pin_me_to_pcpu(parse_pcpu(cpu, &allowed_mask));
That'll result in a slightly larger window where the sanity check could get a
false negative, but that's ok. Detecting conflicts with 100% accuracy isn't
possible since there's always a window where the allowed cpuset could change, the
goal is only to catch the "obvious" cases in order to save the user a bit of debug
time.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-10 16:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-06 17:11 [PATCH v4 0/4] dirty_log_perf_test CPU pinning Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 17:11 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] KVM: selftests: Add missing break between 'e' and 'g' option in dirty_log_perf_test Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 17:11 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] KVM: selftests: Put command line options in alphabetical order " Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 17:11 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] KVM: selftests: Add atoi_paranoid() to catch errors missed by atoi() Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 19:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-06 22:39 ` Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 23:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-06 17:11 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] KVM: selftests: Run dirty_log_perf_test on specific CPUs Vipin Sharma
2022-10-06 19:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-06 20:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-06 23:25 ` Vipin Sharma
2022-10-07 0:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-10-07 17:39 ` Vipin Sharma
2022-10-08 0:46 ` Vipin Sharma
2022-10-10 16:22 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
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=Y0RG2w9cHn01Af41@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=andrew.jones@linux.dev \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vipinsh@google.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.