From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] remove jump_label optimization for perf sched events
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:00:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111117130032.GC16853@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1321534159.27735.33.camel@twins>
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 01:49:19PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 14:30 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > jump_lable patching is very expensive operation that involves pausing all
> > cpus. The patching of perf_sched_events jump_label is easily controllable
> > from userspace by unprivileged user. When user runs loop like this
> > "while true; do perf stat -e cycles true; done" the performance of my
> > test application that just increments a counter for one second drops by
> > 4%. This is on a 16 cpu box with my test application using only one of
> > them. An impact on a real server doing real work will be much worse.
> > Performance of KVM PMU drops nearly 50% due to jump_lable for "perf
> > record" since KVM PMU implementation creates and destroys perf event
> > frequently.
>
> Ideally we'd fix text_poke to not use stop_machine() we know how to, but
> we haven't had the green light from Intel/AMD yet.
>
> Rostedt was going to implement it anyway and see if anything breaks.
>
Hmm interesting.
> Also, virt might be able to pull something smart on text_poke() dunno.
>
The problem with virt is not text_poke() in a guest, but the one in a
host. The guest I am testing with has only one cpu. Basically creating
fist perf event/destroying last perf event is very expensive currently
and when "perf record" is running in a guest this happens a lot in a
host.
> That said, I'd much rather throttle this particular jump label than
> remove it altogether, some people really don't like all this scheduler
> hot path crap.
What about moving perf_event_task_sched() to sched_(in|out)_preempt_notifiers?
preempt notifiers checking is already on the scheduler hot path, so no
additional overhead for perf case.
--
Gleb.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-17 13:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-17 12:30 [PATCH RFC] remove jump_label optimization for perf sched events Gleb Natapov
2011-11-17 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 13:00 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2011-11-17 13:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 13:24 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-17 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 14:12 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-17 13:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-11-17 13:47 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-21 13:17 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-24 13:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-24 13:45 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-24 14:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-24 17:43 ` Gleb Natapov
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=20111117130032.GC16853@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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