public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] [PATCH] Poll : introduce poll_wait_exclusive() new function
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:15:11 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081126111511.GE14826@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811251316590.32523@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>

* Davide Libenzi (davidel@xmailserver.org) wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> 
> > 
> > patch againt: tip/tracing/marker
> > 
> > ==========
> > Currently, wake_up() function behavior depend on the way of
> > wait queue adding function.
> > 
> > 
> >                               wake_up()          wake_up_all()
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > add_wait_queue()              wake up all        wake up all
> > add_wait_queue_exclusive()    wake up one task   wake up all
> > 
> > 
> > Unforunately, poll_wait() always use add_wait_queue().
> > it means there is no way that wake up only one process in polled processes.
> > wake_up() also wake up all sleeping processes, not 1 process.
> > 
> > 
> > Mathieu Desnoyers explained it cause following problem to LTTng.
> > 
> >    In LTTng, all lttd readers are polling all the available debugfs files
> >    for data. This is principally because the number of reader threads is
> >    user-defined and there are typical workloads where a single CPU is
> >    producing most of the tracing data and all other CPUs are idle,
> >    available to consume data. It therefore makes sense not to tie those
> >    threads to specific buffers. However, when the number of threads grows,
> >    we face a "thundering herd" problem where many threads can be woken up
> >    and put back to sleep, leaving only a single thread doing useful work.
> 
> Why do you need to have so many threads banging a single device/file?
> Have one (or any other very little number) puller thread(s), that 
> activates with chucks of pulled data the other processing threads. That 
> way there's no need for a new wakeup abstraction.
> 
> 
> 
> - Davide

One of the key design rule of LTTng is to do not depend on such
system-wide data structures, or entity (e.g. single manager thread).
Everything is per-cpu, and it does scale very well.

I wonder how badly the approach you propose can scale on large NUMA
systems, where having to synchronize everything through a single thread
might become an important point of contention, just due to the cacheline
bouncing and extra scheduler activity involved.

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-11-26 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-24 11:24 [RFC PATCH] Poll : add poll_wait_set_exclusive (fixing thundering herd problem in LTTng) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-11-24 11:44 ` [ltt-dev] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-24 11:51   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-11-24 12:11     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-24 12:16       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-11-25 10:50         ` [PATCH] Poll : introduce poll_wait_exclusive() new function KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-25 21:19           ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-26  1:09             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-26 11:15             ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2008-11-26 11:20               ` [ltt-dev] " Andrew McDermott
2008-11-26 22:27                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-11-27  0:08               ` Davide Libenzi
2008-11-27 12:50                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-28 13:13                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-12-02  1:27                   ` Davide Libenzi
2008-12-02  4:44                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro

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=20081126111511.GE14826@Krystal \
    --to=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
    --cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltt-dev@lists.casi.polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.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