linux-doc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	"Vincent Guittot" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Valentin Schneider" <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com>,
	Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] sched/core: Drop spinlocks on contention iff kernel is preemptible
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 15:41:43 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZioJN6ClnlFIQIBg@chenyu5-mobl2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240312193911.1796717-3-seanjc@google.com>

Hi Sean,

On 2024-03-12 at 12:39:11 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Use preempt_model_preemptible() to detect a preemptible kernel when
> deciding whether or not to reschedule in order to drop a contended
> spinlock or rwlock.  Because PREEMPT_DYNAMIC selects PREEMPTION, kernels

It took me a while to wonder why PREEMPT_DYNAMIC selects PREEMPTION
in Kconfig, then I assume that you mean the static config is CONFIG_PREEMPTION,
but the live preemption model is "none" or "voluntary", which makes the
static check of CONFIG_PREEMPTION in spin_needbreak() and rwlock_needbreak()
invalid?

> built with PREEMPT_DYNAMIC=y will yield contended locks even if the live
> preemption model is "none" or "voluntary".


> In short, make kernels with
> dynamically selected models behave the same as kernels with statically
> selected models.
> 
> Somewhat counter-intuitively, NOT yielding a lock can provide better
> latency for the relevant tasks/processes.  E.g. KVM x86's mmu_lock, a
> rwlock, is often contended between an invalidation event (takes mmu_lock
> for write) and a vCPU servicing a guest page fault (takes mmu_lock for
> read).  For _some_ setups, letting the invalidation task complete even
> if there is mmu_lock contention provides lower latency for *all* tasks,
> i.e. the invalidation completes sooner *and* the vCPU services the guest
> page fault sooner.
> 
> But even KVM's mmu_lock behavior isn't uniform, e.g. the "best" behavior
> can vary depending on the host VMM, the guest workload, the number of
> vCPUs, the number of pCPUs in the host, why there is lock contention, etc.
> 
> In other words, simply deleting the CONFIG_PREEMPTION guard (or doing the
> opposite and removing contention yielding entirely) needs to come with a
> big pile of data proving that changing the status quo is a net positive.
> 
> Opportunistically document this side effect of preempt=full, as yielding
> contended spinlocks can have significant, user-visible impact.
> 
> Fixes: c597bfddc9e9 ("sched: Provide Kconfig support for default dynamic preempt mode")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/ef81ff36-64bb-4cfe-ae9b-e3acf47bff24@proxmox.com
> Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
> Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
> Cc: Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com>
> Cc: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt |  4 +++-
>  include/linux/spinlock.h                        | 14 ++++++--------
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 825398d66c69..fdeddb066439 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -4689,7 +4689,9 @@
>  			none - Limited to cond_resched() calls
>  			voluntary - Limited to cond_resched() and might_sleep() calls
>  			full - Any section that isn't explicitly preempt disabled
> -			       can be preempted anytime.
> +			       can be preempted anytime.  Tasks will also yield
> +			       contended spinlocks (if the critical section isn't
> +			       explicitly preempt disabled beyond the lock itself).
>  
>  	print-fatal-signals=
>  			[KNL] debug: print fatal signals
> diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> index 3fcd20de6ca8..63dd8cf3c3c2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> @@ -462,11 +462,10 @@ static __always_inline int spin_is_contended(spinlock_t *lock)
>   */
>  static inline int spin_needbreak(spinlock_t *lock)
>  {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPTION
> +	if (!preempt_model_preemptible())

The old version checks against static CONFIG_PREEMPTION, now we check
the live CONFIG_PREEMPTION and static CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT, just wonder
if the rt check is needed here?

thanks,
Chenyu 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-04-25  7:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-12 19:39 [PATCH v2 0/2] sched/core: Fix spinlocks vs. PREEMPT_DYNAMIC=y Sean Christopherson
2024-03-12 19:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/core: Move preempt_model_*() helpers from sched.h to preempt.h Sean Christopherson
2024-04-25  6:19   ` Ankur Arora
2024-03-12 19:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] sched/core: Drop spinlocks on contention iff kernel is preemptible Sean Christopherson
2024-04-25  6:18   ` Ankur Arora
2024-04-25  7:41   ` Chen Yu [this message]
2024-04-25 16:47     ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-26  3:41       ` Chen Yu
2024-04-24 20:08 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] sched/core: Fix spinlocks vs. PREEMPT_DYNAMIC=y Sean Christopherson

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=ZioJN6ClnlFIQIBg@chenyu5-mobl2 \
    --to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=ankur.a.arora@oracle.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=f.weber@proxmox.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --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).