From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Josh Cartwright <joshc@ni.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt] Revert "net: use synchronize_rcu_expedited()"
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:44:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151027004422.GH5105@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1445886895-3692-1-git-send-email-joshc@ni.com>
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:14:55PM -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> This reverts commit be3fc413da9eb17cce0991f214ab019d16c88c41.
>
> While the use of synchronize_rcu_expedited() might make
> synchronize_net() "faster", it does so at significant cost on RT
> systems, as expediting a grace period forcibly preempts any
> high-priority RT tasks (via the stop_machine() mechanism).
>
> Without be3fc413da9e reverted, we can observe a latency spike up to 30us
> with cyclictest by rapidly unplugging/reestablishing an ethernet link.
>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <joshc@ni.com>
Hmmm... If I remember correctly, using expedited here resulted
in impressive performance improvements in some important cases.
Perhaps things have changed (I must defer to Eric), but if not, how
about something like this instead?
if (rtnl_is_locked() && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREMPT_RT_FULL))
synchronize_rcu_expedited();
else
synchronize_rcu();
Alternatively, a boot-time option could be used:
if (rtnl_is_locked() && !some_rt_boot_parameter)
synchronize_rcu_expedited();
else
synchronize_rcu();
I believe that the first alternative is better because it does the right
thing without user intervention. The second would be preferred should
distros want to offer full RT by default, but I am guessing thta most
distros would be reluctant to do this for some time to come.
Either way, these approaches have the advantage of giving RT users the
latency they need, even in the face of networking configuration changes,
while giving non-RT users the required performance of the networking
configuration changes themselves.
Thanx, Paul
> ---
> net/core/dev.c | 5 +----
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index f8c23de..869ef62 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -6969,10 +6969,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(free_netdev);
> void synchronize_net(void)
> {
> might_sleep();
> - if (rtnl_is_locked())
> - synchronize_rcu_expedited();
> - else
> - synchronize_rcu();
> + synchronize_rcu();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(synchronize_net);
>
> --
> 2.5.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-27 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-26 19:14 [PATCH -rt] Revert "net: use synchronize_rcu_expedited()" Josh Cartwright
2015-10-27 0:44 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-10-27 12:31 ` Josh Cartwright
2015-10-27 14:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-10-27 15:02 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-10-27 15:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-10-27 23:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-28 8:34 ` Josh Cartwright
2015-10-28 12:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-30 9:16 ` David Miller
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=20151027004422.GH5105@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=joshc@ni.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).