From: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: Eliminate softirq processing from rcutree
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 04:07:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1387681647.5412.25.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131221193900.GA8427@linutronix.de>
On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 20:39 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Running RCU out of softirq is a problem for some workloads that would
> like to manage RCU core processing independently of other softirq work,
> for example, setting kthread priority. This commit therefore moves the
> RCU core work from softirq to a per-CPU/per-flavor SCHED_OTHER kthread
> named rcuc. The SCHED_OTHER approach avoids the scalability problems
> that appeared with the earlier attempt to move RCU core processing to
> from softirq to kthreads. That said, kernels built with RCU_BOOST=y
> will run the rcuc kthreads at the RCU-boosting priority.
I'll take this for a spin on my 64 core test box.
I'm pretty sure I'll still end up having to split softirq threads again
though, as big box has been unable to meet jitter requirements without,
and last upstream rt kernel tested still couldn't.
-Mike
Hm. Another thing I'll have to check again is btrfs locking fix, and
generic IO deadlocks if you don't pull your plug upon first rtmutex
block. In 3.0, both were required for box to survive heavy fs pounding.
Oh yeah, and the pain of rt tasks playing idle balance for SCHED_OTHER
tasks, and nohz balancing crud, and cpupri cost when cores are isolated
and and.. sigh, big boxen _suck_ ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-22 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-21 19:39 [PATCH] rcu: Eliminate softirq processing from rcutree Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2013-12-22 3:07 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2013-12-22 8:57 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-12-23 4:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-12-23 5:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-24 19:46 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2014-01-25 5:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-12-24 19:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-25 3:07 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-12-25 7:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-12-25 17:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-17 17:14 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2014-01-18 3:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-24 19:50 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2014-01-25 5:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-27 5:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-27 16:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-27 17:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-12-26 10:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-17 17:23 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2014-01-18 3:30 ` Mike Galbraith
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=1387681647.5412.25.camel@marge.simpson.net \
--to=bitbucket@online.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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