public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
To: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: 2.6.14-rc4 latency issue with rcu_process_callbacks()/file_free_rcu()
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:07:33 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051020140733.GA21149@sgi.com> (raw)

Just bringing up a latency issue I've noticed recently.

In or around 2.6.14-rc4 some changes were made to have the call to
kmem_cache_free() from file_free() in the Linux kernel be deferred, running
as a tasklet via file_free_rcu(), rather than running kmem_cache_free()
right from file_free() directly.

I've noticed that rcu_process_callbacks() can take quite a while to run
now that it routinely calls file_free_rcu() to run kmem_cache_free().
This can make the cpu unavailable for 100's of usec on 1GHz machines, with
or without preemption configured on (much of this path is non-preemptible).

This can result in some unpredictable periods of fairly long cpu latency,
such as when a thread is waiting to be woken by an interrupt handler on a
'now quiet' cpu.  Changing file_free() to call kmem_cache_free() directly
completely eliminates this unexpected latency.

Here's the stack trace that illustrates what I'm talking about:

 [<a0000001001154a0>] kmem_cache_free+0x140/0x3c0
                                sp=e00000307bc27dc0 bsp=e00000307bc21070
 [<a000000100153950>] file_free_rcu+0x30/0x60
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc21050
 [<a0000001000d89c0>] __rcu_process_callbacks+0x2c0/0x5e0
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc21010
 [<a0000001000d8d40>] rcu_process_callbacks+0x60/0xc0
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc20fe8
 [<a0000001000baae0>] tasklet_action+0x2c0/0x320
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc20f98
 [<a0000001000ba0d0>] __do_softirq+0x130/0x240
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc20ef8
 [<a0000001000ba260>] do_softirq+0x80/0xe0
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc20e98
 [<a0000001000ba4a0>] ksoftirqd+0x140/0x1a0
                                sp=e00000307bc27dd0 bsp=e00000307bc20e68

Dimitri Sivanich

             reply	other threads:[~2005-10-20 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-10-20 14:07 Dimitri Sivanich [this message]
2005-10-20 15:56 ` 2.6.14-rc4 latency issue with rcu_process_callbacks()/file_free_rcu() Eric Dumazet
2005-10-20 16:31   ` Dimitri Sivanich

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=20051020140733.GA21149@sgi.com \
    --to=sivanich@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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