public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
	laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
	dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com,
	fweisbec@gmail.com, patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 6/6] rcu: Reduce cache-miss initialization latencies for large systems
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 07:12:13 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120426141213.GB2407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335444707.13683.14.camel@twins>

On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:51:47PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 09:42 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > 
> > Commit #0209f649 (rcu: limit rcu_node leaf-level fanout) set an upper
> > limit of 16 on the leaf-level fanout for the rcu_node tree.  This was
> > needed to reduce lock contention that was induced by the synchronization
> > of scheduling-clock interrupts, which was in turn needed to improve
> > energy efficiency for moderate-sized lightly loaded servers.
> > 
> > However, reducing the leaf-level fanout means that there are more
> > leaf-level rcu_node structures in the tree, which in turn means that
> > RCU's grace-period initialization incurs more cache misses.  This is
> > not a problem on moderate-sized servers with only a few tens of CPUs,
> > but becomes a major source of real-time latency spikes on systems with
> > many hundreds of CPUs.  In addition, the workloads running on these large
> > systems tend to be CPU-bound, which eliminates the energy-efficiency
> > advantages of synchronizing scheduling-clock interrupts.  Therefore,
> > these systems need maximal values for the rcu_node leaf-level fanout.
> > 
> > This commit addresses this problem by introducing a new kernel parameter
> > named RCU_FANOUT_LEAF that directly controls the leaf-level fanout.
> > This parameter defaults to 16 to handle the common case of a moderate
> > sized lightly loaded servers, but may be set higher on larger systems.
> 
> Wouldn't it be much better to match the rcu fanout tree to the physical
> topology of the machine?

>From what I am hearing, doing so requires me to morph the rcu_node tree
at run time.  I might eventually become courageous/inspired/senile
enough to try this, but not yet.  ;-)

Actually, some of this topology shifting seems to me like a firmware
bug.  Why not arrange the Linux-visible numbering in a way to promote
locality for code sequencing through the CPUs?

							Thanx, Paul


  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-26 14:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-23 16:41 [PATCH RFC 0/6] Miscellaneous RCU fixes for 3.5 Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-23 16:42 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/6] rcu: Stabilize use of num_online_cpus() for GP short circuit Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-23 16:42   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 2/6] rcu: List-debug variants of rcu list routines Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-23 16:42   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 3/6] rcu: Replace list_first_entry_rcu() with list_first_or_null_rcu() Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-23 16:42   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 4/6] rcu: Clarify help text for RCU_BOOST_PRIO Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 12:46     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 17:28       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-23 16:42   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 5/6] rcu: Make __kfree_rcu() less dependent on compiler choices Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 12:48     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 13:29       ` Jan Engelhardt
2012-04-26 13:50         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-23 16:42   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 6/6] rcu: Reduce cache-miss initialization latencies for large systems Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 12:51     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 14:12       ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-04-26 15:28         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 16:15           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 19:41             ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 19:47               ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 20:29                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 22:04                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-26 20:28               ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-26 22:01                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-27 14:17                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-27  4:36     ` Mike Galbraith
2012-04-27 15:15       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-28  4:42         ` Mike Galbraith
2012-04-28 17:21           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-29  3:54             ` Mike Galbraith
2012-04-24 15:35   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/6] rcu: Stabilize use of num_online_cpus() for GP short circuit Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-04-24 16:50     ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-24 17:46       ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-05-07  3:47       ` Rusty Russell

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=20120426141213.GB2407@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=darren@dvhart.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=patches@linaro.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --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