public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: [patch] notifiers: fix blocking_notifier_call_chain() scalability
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:45:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070123094550.GA21105@elte.hu> (raw)

Subject: [patch] notifiers: fix blocking_notifier_call_chain() scalability
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

while lock-profiling the -rt kernel i noticed weird contention during 
mmap-intense workloads, and the tracer showed the following gem, in one 
of our MM hotpaths:

 threaded-2771  1....   65us : sys_munmap (sysenter_do_call)
 threaded-2771  1....   66us : profile_munmap (sys_munmap)
 threaded-2771  1....   66us : blocking_notifier_call_chain (profile_munmap)
 threaded-2771  1....   66us : rt_down_read (blocking_notifier_call_chain)

ouch! a global rw-semaphore taken in one of the most 
performance-sensitive codepaths of the kernel. And i dont even have 
oprofile enabled! All distro kernels have CONFIG_PROFILING enabled, so 
this scalability problem affects the majority of Linux users.

The fix is to enhance blocking_notifier_call_chain() to only take the 
lock if there appears to be work on the call-chain.

With this patch applied i get nicely saturated system, and much higher 
munmap performance, on SMP systems.

And as a bonus this also fixes a similar scalability bottleneck in the 
thread-exit codepath: profile_task_exit() ...

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
 kernel/sys.c |   15 +++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Index: linux/kernel/sys.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sys.c
+++ linux/kernel/sys.c
@@ -325,11 +325,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blocking_notifier_chai
 int blocking_notifier_call_chain(struct blocking_notifier_head *nh,
 		unsigned long val, void *v)
 {
-	int ret;
+	int ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
 
-	down_read(&nh->rwsem);
-	ret = notifier_call_chain(&nh->head, val, v);
-	up_read(&nh->rwsem);
+	/*
+	 * We check the head outside the lock, but if this access is
+	 * racy then it does not matter what the result of the test
+	 * is, we re-check the list after having taken the lock anyway:
+	 */
+	if (rcu_dereference(nh->head)) {
+		down_read(&nh->rwsem);
+		ret = notifier_call_chain(&nh->head, val, v);
+		up_read(&nh->rwsem);
+	}
 	return ret;
 }
 

             reply	other threads:[~2007-01-23  9:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-23  9:45 Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-01-23 11:24 ` [patch] notifiers: fix blocking_notifier_call_chain() scalability Peter Zijlstra
2007-01-23 15:11   ` Nick Piggin

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=20070123094550.GA21105@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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