From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: "wuqiang.matt" <wuqiang.matt@bytedance.com>,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhiramat@kernel.org,
davem@davemloft.net, anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com,
naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, sander@svanheule.net,
ebiggers@google.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
jpoimboe@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@intel.com,
mattwu@163.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] lib,kprobes: using try_cmpxchg_local in objpool_push
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:01:34 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231024100134.2dbabbf01f968a000507ba94@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231023114304.1bebb327@gandalf.local.home>
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:43:04 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:24:52 +0800
> "wuqiang.matt" <wuqiang.matt@bytedance.com> wrote:
>
> > The objpool_push can only happen on local cpu node, so only the local
> > cpu can touch slot->tail and slot->last, which ensures the correctness
> > of using cmpxchg without lock prefix (using try_cmpxchg_local instead
> > of try_cmpxchg_acquire).
> >
> > Testing with IACA found the lock version of pop/push pair costs 16.46
> > cycles and local-push version costs 15.63 cycles. Kretprobe throughput
> > is improved to 1.019 times of the lock version for x86_64 systems.
> >
> > OS: Debian 10 X86_64, Linux 6.6rc6 with freelist
> > HW: XEON 8336C x 2, 64 cores/128 threads, DDR4 3200MT/s
> >
> > 1T 2T 4T 8T 16T
> > lock: 29909085 59865637 119692073 239750369 478005250
> > local: 30297523 60532376 121147338 242598499 484620355
> > 32T 48T 64T 96T 128T
> > lock: 957553042 1435814086 1680872925 2043126796 2165424198
> > local: 968526317 1454991286 1861053557 2059530343 2171732306
> >
> > Signed-off-by: wuqiang.matt <wuqiang.matt@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> > lib/objpool.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/objpool.c b/lib/objpool.c
> > index ce0087f64400..a032701beccb 100644
> > --- a/lib/objpool.c
> > +++ b/lib/objpool.c
> > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ objpool_try_add_slot(void *obj, struct objpool_head *pool, int cpu)
> > head = READ_ONCE(slot->head);
> > /* fault caught: something must be wrong */
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(tail - head > pool->nr_objs);
> > - } while (!try_cmpxchg_acquire(&slot->tail, &tail, tail + 1));
> > + } while (!try_cmpxchg_local(&slot->tail, &tail, tail + 1));
> >
> > /* now the tail position is reserved for the given obj */
> > WRITE_ONCE(slot->entries[tail & slot->mask], obj);
>
> I'm good with the change, but I don't like how "cpu" is passed to this
> function. It currently is only used in one location, which does:
>
> rc = objpool_try_add_slot(obj, pool, raw_smp_processor_id());
>
> Which makes this change fine. But there's nothing here to prevent someone
> for some reason passing another CPU to that function.
>
> If we are to make that change, I would be much more comfortable with
> removing "int cpu" as a parameter to objpool_try_add_slot() and adding:
>
> int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
>
> Which now shows that this function *only* deals with the current CPU.
Oh indeed. It used to search all CPUs to push the object, but
I asked him to stop that because there should be enough space to
push it in the local ring. This is a remnant of that time.
Wuqiang, can you make another patch to fix it?
Thank you,
>
> -- Steve
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-24 1:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-23 11:24 [PATCH v1] lib,kprobes: using try_cmpxchg_local in objpool_push wuqiang.matt
2023-10-23 15:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-24 1:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2023-10-24 1:57 ` wuqiang.matt
2023-10-24 11:03 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2023-10-24 0:56 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2023-10-29 17:05 ` Guenter Roeck
2023-10-30 1:57 ` wuqiang.matt
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=20231024100134.2dbabbf01f968a000507ba94@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=mattwu@163.com \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sander@svanheule.net \
--cc=wuqiang.matt@bytedance.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).