linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	mingo@redhat.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, paulus@samba.org,
	benh@kernel.crashing.org, Waiman.Long@hpe.com,
	boqun.feng@gmail.com, will.deacon@arm.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
	Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq_lock()
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:41:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1467049290-32359-4-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1467049290-32359-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

An over-committed guest with more vCPUs than pCPUs has a heavy overload
in osq_lock().

This is because vCPU A hold the osq lock and yield out, vCPU B wait
per_cpu node->locked to be set. IOW, vCPU B wait vCPU A to run and
unlock the osq lock. Such spinning is meaningless.

So lets use vcpu_is_preempted() to detect if we need stop the spinning

test case:
perf record -a perf bench sched messaging -g 400 -p && perf report

before patch:
18.09%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] osq_lock
12.28%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
 5.27%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_unlock
 3.89%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] wait_consider_task
 3.64%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] _raw_write_lock_irq
 3.41%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_spin_on_owner.is
 2.49%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call

after patch:
20.68%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
 8.45%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_unlock
 4.12%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call
 3.01%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call_common
 2.83%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] copypage_power7
 2.64%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
 2.00%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] osq_lock

Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 05a3785..9e86f0b 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ static inline int encode_cpu(int cpu_nr)
 	return cpu_nr + 1;
 }
 
+static inline int node_cpu(struct optimistic_spin_node *node)
+{
+	return node->cpu - 1;
+}
+
 static inline struct optimistic_spin_node *decode_cpu(int encoded_cpu_val)
 {
 	int cpu_nr = encoded_cpu_val - 1;
@@ -118,8 +123,17 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
 	while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
 		/*
 		 * If we need to reschedule bail... so we can block.
+		 * An over-committed guest with more vCPUs than pCPUs
+		 * might fall in this loop and cause a huge overload.
+		 * This is because vCPU A(prev) hold the osq lock and yield out
+		 * vCPU B(node) wait ->locked to be set, IOW, it wait utill
+		 * vCPU A run and unlock the osq lock. Such spin is meaningless
+		 * use vcpu_is_preempted to detech such case. IF arch does not
+		 * support vcpu preempted check, vcpu_is_preempted is a macro
+		 * defined by false.
 		 */
-		if (need_resched())
+		if (need_resched() ||
+			vcpu_is_preempted(node_cpu(node->prev)))
 			goto unqueue;
 
 		cpu_relax_lowlatency();
-- 
2.4.11

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-06-27 13:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-27 17:41 [PATCH 0/3] implement vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-06-27 17:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] kernel/sched: introduce vcpu preempted check interface Pan Xinhui
2016-06-27 14:00   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-27 14:02     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-28  3:14       ` xinhui
2016-06-28  7:00     ` Heiko Carstens
2016-06-28  9:47       ` xinhui
2016-06-27 14:05   ` Boqun Feng
2016-06-28  3:15     ` xinhui
2016-06-27 17:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/spinlock: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-06-27 14:17   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-28  3:23     ` xinhui
2016-06-27 14:58   ` Boqun Feng
2016-06-28  3:39     ` xinhui
2016-06-28  5:03       ` Boqun Feng
2016-06-28  5:38         ` xinhui
2016-06-27 17:41 ` Pan Xinhui [this message]
2016-06-27 14:21   ` [PATCH 3/3] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq_lock() Peter Zijlstra

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=1467049290-32359-4-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=Waiman.Long@hpe.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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).