linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: leitao@debian.org
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, kernel-team@meta.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	paulmck@kernel.org, rmikey@meta.com, will@kernel.org,
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Overhead of arm64 LSE per-CPU atomics?
Date: Tue,  4 Nov 2025 20:57:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251104205753.42224-1-puranjay@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ahkk2r22peni4s7j6c7tnv3uajvwiaeg3vwyusppblcokpvgjw@zuuzipntgu7x>

Hi Breno,

I tried your benchmark on AWS graviton platforms:

On EC2 c8g.metal-24xl (96 cpus Neoverse-V2) (AWS Graviton 4):

With ldadd, it was stable and LSE is always better than LL/SC

But with stadd, I saw some spikes in p95 and p99:

 CPU: 28 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 6.61 ns     p95: 6.61 ns    p99: 6.62 ns
LSE  :   p50: 4.64 ns     p95: 4.65 ns    p99: 4.65 ns

 CPU: 30 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 6.61 ns     p95: 6.61 ns    p99: 6.62 ns
LSE  :   p50: 4.64 ns     p95: 14.24 ns  ***p99: 27.74 ns***


On EC2 m6g.metal (64 cpus Neoverse-N1) (AWS Graviton 2):

Here both stadd and ldadd were stable and LSE was always better than LL/SC

with ldadd:

ARM64 Per-CPU Atomic Add Benchmark
===================================
Running percentile measurements (100 iterations)...
Detected 64 CPUs

 CPU: 0 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.40 ns     p95: 8.40 ns    p99: 8.42 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.60 ns     p95: 5.60 ns    p99: 5.61 ns

 CPU: 1 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.40 ns     p95: 8.40 ns    p99: 8.41 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.60 ns     p95: 5.60 ns    p99: 5.61 ns


[....]

 CPU: 62 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.40 ns     p95: 8.40 ns    p99: 8.40 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.60 ns     p95: 5.60 ns    p99: 5.60 ns

 CPU: 63 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.40 ns     p95: 8.40 ns    p99: 8.41 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.60 ns     p95: 5.60 ns    p99: 5.60 ns

=== Benchmark Complete ===

With stadd:

ARM64 Per-CPU Atomic Add Benchmark
===================================
Running percentile measurements (100 iterations)...
Detected 64 CPUs

 CPU: 0 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.00 ns     p95: 8.01 ns    p99: 8.02 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.20 ns     p95: 5.21 ns    p99: 5.21 ns

 CPU: 1 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.00 ns     p95: 8.01 ns    p99: 8.01 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.20 ns     p95: 5.21 ns    p99: 5.22 ns


[.....]

 CPU: 62 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.00 ns     p95: 8.01 ns    p99: 8.14 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.20 ns     p95: 5.21 ns    p99: 5.21 ns

 CPU: 63 - Latency Percentiles:
====================
LL/SC:   p50: 8.00 ns     p95: 8.01 ns    p99: 8.01 ns
LSE  :   p50: 5.20 ns     p95: 5.20 ns    p99: 5.20 ns

=== Benchmark Complete ===


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-11-04 20:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-30 22:37 Overhead of arm64 LSE per-CPU atomics? Paul E. McKenney
2025-10-31 18:30 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-10-31 19:39   ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-10-31 22:21     ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-10-31 22:43     ` Catalin Marinas
2025-10-31 23:38       ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-01  3:25         ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-01  9:44           ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-01 18:07             ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-01 11:23           ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-01 11:41             ` Yicong Yang
2025-11-05 13:25               ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 13:42                 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-05 14:49                   ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 16:21                     ` Breno Leitao
2025-11-06  7:44                     ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-06 13:53                       ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-06 14:16                         ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-03 20:12             ` Palmer Dabbelt
2025-11-03 21:49           ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-03 21:56             ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-04 17:05           ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-04 18:43             ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-04 20:10               ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-05 15:34                 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 16:25                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-05 17:15                     ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 17:40                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-05 19:16                         ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 19:47                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-05 20:17                             ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-05 20:45                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-05 21:13                           ` Palmer Dabbelt
2025-11-06 14:00                             ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-06 16:30                               ` Palmer Dabbelt
2025-11-06 17:54                                 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-06 18:23                                   ` Palmer Dabbelt
2025-11-04 15:59   ` Breno Leitao
2025-11-04 17:06     ` Catalin Marinas
2025-11-04 18:08     ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-04 18:22       ` Breno Leitao
2025-11-04 20:13       ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-04 20:35         ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-04 21:25           ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-04 20:57     ` Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2025-11-27 12:29     ` Wentao Guan

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=20251104205753.42224-1-puranjay@kernel.org \
    --to=puranjay@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rmikey@meta.com \
    --cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).