public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
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,
	peterz@infradead.org, 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: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:15:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120427151518.GA2419@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335501371.10374.30.camel@marge.simpson.net>

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 06:36:11AM +0200, Mike Galbraith 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,
> 
> With a distro config (4096 CPUs) interrupt latency is bad even on a
> quad.  Traversing empty nodes taking locks and cache misses hurts.

Agreed -- and I will be working on an additional patch that makes RCU
avoid initializing its data structures for CPUs that don't exist.

That said, increasing the leaf-level fanout from 16 to 64 should reduce
the latency pain by a factor of four.  In addition, I would expect that
real-time builds of the kernel would set NR_CPUS to some value much
smaller than 4096.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul


  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-27 15:15 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
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 [this message]
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=20120427151518.GA2419@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=efault@gmx.de \
    --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