linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: elver@google.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize for thousands of tasks
Date: Thu,  9 Jun 2022 13:30:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220609113046.780504-1-elver@google.com> (raw)

The hw_breakpoint subsystem's code has seen little change in over 10
years. In that time, systems with >100s of CPUs have become common,
along with improvements to the perf subsystem: using breakpoints on
thousands of concurrent tasks should be a supported usecase.

The breakpoint constraints accounting algorithm is the major bottleneck
in doing so:

  1. task_bp_pinned() has been O(#tasks), and called twice for each CPU.

  2. Everything is serialized on a global mutex, 'nr_bp_mutex'.

This series first optimizes task_bp_pinned() to only take O(1) on
average, and then reworks synchronization to allow concurrency when
checking and updating breakpoint constraints for tasks. Along the way,
smaller micro-optimizations and cleanups are done as they seemed obvious
when staring at the code (but likely insignificant).

The result is (on a system with 256 CPUs) that we go from:

 | $> perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64
	 	[ ^ more aggressive benchmark parameters took too long ]
 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark:
 | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism
 |      Total time: 236.418 [sec]
 |
 |   123134.794271 usecs/op
 |  7880626.833333 usecs/op/cpu

... to -- with all optimizations:

 | $> perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64
 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark:
 | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism
 |      Total time: 0.071 [sec]
 |
 |       37.134896 usecs/op
 |     2376.633333 usecs/op/cpu

On the used test system, that's an effective speedup of ~3315x per op.

Which is close to the theoretical ideal performance through
optimizations in hw_breakpoint.c -- for reference, constraints
accounting disabled:

 | perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64
 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark:
 | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism
 |      Total time: 0.067 [sec]
 |
 |       35.286458 usecs/op
 |     2258.333333 usecs/op/cpu

At this point, the current implementation is only ~5% slower than the
theoretical ideal. However, given constraints accounting cannot
realistically be disabled, this is likely as far as we can push it.

Marco Elver (8):
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize list of per-task breakpoints
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Mark data __ro_after_init
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize constant number of breakpoint slots
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Make hw_breakpoint_weight() inlinable
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Remove useless code related to flexible
    breakpoints
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Reduce contention with large number of tasks
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize task_bp_pinned() if CPU-independent
  perf/hw_breakpoint: Clean up headers

 arch/sh/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h  |   5 +-
 arch/x86/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h |   5 +-
 include/linux/hw_breakpoint.h        |   1 -
 include/linux/perf_event.h           |   3 +-
 kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c        | 374 +++++++++++++++++++--------
 5 files changed, 276 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)

-- 
2.36.1.255.ge46751e96f-goog

             reply	other threads:[~2022-06-09 11:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-09 11:30 Marco Elver [this message]
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 1/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize list of per-task breakpoints Marco Elver
2022-06-09 12:30   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 12:53     ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 13:05       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 14:29   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 14:55     ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 16:53       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 18:37         ` Marco Elver
2022-06-10  9:04           ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-10  9:36             ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 2/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Mark data __ro_after_init Marco Elver
2022-06-09 11:45   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 3/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize constant number of breakpoint slots Marco Elver
2022-06-09 11:55   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 4/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Make hw_breakpoint_weight() inlinable Marco Elver
2022-06-09 12:03   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 12:08     ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 12:23       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 13:25     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 5/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Remove useless code related to flexible breakpoints Marco Elver
2022-06-09 12:04   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 13:41     ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 14:00       ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 6/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Reduce contention with large number of tasks Marco Elver
2022-06-09 13:03   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 13:29     ` Marco Elver
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 7/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize task_bp_pinned() if CPU-independent Marco Elver
2022-06-09 15:00   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-10  8:25     ` Marco Elver
2022-06-10  9:13       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 11:30 ` [PATCH 8/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Clean up headers Marco Elver
2022-06-09 12:11   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-06-09 12:28 ` [PATCH 0/8] perf/hw_breakpoint: Optimize for thousands of tasks Dmitry Vyukov

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=20220609113046.780504-1-elver@google.com \
    --to=elver@google.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@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).