From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
Yair Podemsky <ypodemsk@redhat.com>, P J P <ppandit@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/buffer.c: disable per-CPU buffer_head cache for isolated CPUs
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 11:31:26 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZMEuPoKQ0cb+iMtl@tpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZJtBrybavtb1x45V@tpad>
Ping, apparently there is no objection to this patch...
Christian, what is the preferred tree for integration?
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 05:08:15PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
> For certain types of applications (for example PLC software or
> RAN processing), upon occurrence of an event, it is necessary to
> complete a certain task in a maximum amount of time (deadline).
>
> One way to express this requirement is with a pair of numbers,
> deadline time and execution time, where:
>
> * deadline time: length of time between event and deadline.
> * execution time: length of time it takes for processing of event
> to occur on a particular hardware platform
> (uninterrupted).
>
> The particular values depend on use-case. For the case
> where the realtime application executes in a virtualized
> guest, an IPI which must be serviced in the host will cause
> the following sequence of events:
>
> 1) VM-exit
> 2) execution of IPI (and function call)
> 3) VM-entry
>
> Which causes an excess of 50us latency as observed by cyclictest
> (this violates the latency requirement of vRAN application with 1ms TTI,
> for example).
>
> invalidate_bh_lrus calls an IPI on each CPU that has non empty
> per-CPU cache:
>
> on_each_cpu_cond(has_bh_in_lru, invalidate_bh_lru, NULL, 1);
>
> The performance when using the per-CPU LRU cache is as follows:
>
> 42 ns per __find_get_block
> 68 ns per __find_get_block_slow
>
> Given that the main use cases for latency sensitive applications
> do not involve block I/O (data necessary for program operation is
> locked in RAM), disable per-CPU buffer_head caches for isolated CPUs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
>
> diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c
> index a7fc561758b1..49e9160ce100 100644
> --- a/fs/buffer.c
> +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@
> #include <trace/events/block.h>
> #include <linux/fscrypt.h>
> #include <linux/fsverity.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
>
> #include "internal.h"
>
> @@ -1289,7 +1290,7 @@ static void bh_lru_install(struct buffer_head *bh)
> * failing page migration.
> * Skip putting upcoming bh into bh_lru until migration is done.
> */
> - if (lru_cache_disabled()) {
> + if (lru_cache_disabled() || cpu_is_isolated(smp_processor_id())) {
> bh_lru_unlock();
> return;
> }
> @@ -1319,6 +1320,10 @@ lookup_bh_lru(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t block, unsigned size)
>
> check_irqs_on();
> bh_lru_lock();
> + if (cpu_is_isolated(smp_processor_id())) {
> + bh_lru_unlock();
> + return NULL;
> + }
> for (i = 0; i < BH_LRU_SIZE; i++) {
> struct buffer_head *bh = __this_cpu_read(bh_lrus.bhs[i]);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-26 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-27 20:08 [PATCH] fs/buffer.c: disable per-CPU buffer_head cache for isolated CPUs Marcelo Tosatti
2023-07-26 14:31 ` Marcelo Tosatti [this message]
2023-07-27 9:18 ` Christian Brauner
2023-07-28 19:35 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2023-08-04 22:03 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-08-04 23:54 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2023-08-10 10:36 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-08-10 11:59 ` Christian Brauner
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=ZMEuPoKQ0cb+iMtl@tpad \
--to=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=leobras@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ppandit@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ypodemsk@redhat.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 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).