public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] rcu: Cleanup rcu_init_geometry() code and arithmetics
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:47:02 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150307214702.GP5236@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150307185954.GB15033@agordeev.usersys.redhat.com>

On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 06:59:54PM +0000, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 10:08:21AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > The rest of this series looks promising, but I do have to ask...  How have
> > you tested these?  The most straightforward approach would be to find
> 
> I tried trees with 1,2 and 3 levels on a 160-CPU machine + dozens of kernel
> builds with 'make -j160'. I feel bit guilty I did not try the corner case
> with 4 levels, but run-time-wise it is not really differ from what I done.
> 
> Do you expect the below is a better option?

What you did is not bad, actually.  You can get four levels by building
with both CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT and CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF equal to five,
and that will also test non-power-of-two choices.  You do that, and I
will give your series a shot.

What I need to do is to create a user-level test that does the full
exhaustive test, varying:

o	NR_CPUS from 1 to 4096
o	nr_cpu_ids from 1 to NR_CPUS
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT from 2 to 64
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF from 2 to 64
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT from n to y

Unfortunately, if each test case took one millisecond, this would take
two years.  Not so good when a new version of Linux comes out every
couple of months.  Of course, this could be paralellized, but still...

So I should focus on the values actually used, especially for NR_CPUS:

o	NR_CPUS from 1 to 4096 by powers of two, for 13 combinations
o	nr_cpu_ids from 1 to NR_CPUS
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT of 32 or 64
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF of 16, 32, or 64
o	CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT of n or y

This is 268,435,452 test cases, which is about tree days at one
millisecond per case.  (My current single-use manual-inspection test
takes eight milliseconds, but then again it is printing out tons of
stuff.)  But I do need to add at least a few oddball values -- there
was a bug for some years that happened only with CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT and
CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF not dividing evenly.

Or maybe I can use cbmc and make things faster.

Anyway, again, if you do the test with CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT and
CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF equal to five, this user-level testing is my
problem rather than yours.

							Thanx, Paul

> > a KVM-capable system with at least 16 CPUs and type the following from
> > the top-level directory:
> > 
> > sh tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/kvm.sh --cpus 34 --duration 5
> > 
> > This will do a series of 16 build-boot-test cycles with various configs
> > (including various rcu_node tree shapes), and print a summary of the
> > outcome at the end.
> > 
> > For these sorts of changes, I usually also do some user-level testing.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Alexander Gordeev
> agordeev@redhat.com
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-07 21:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-07 17:03 [PATCH 0/9] rcu: Cleanup RCU tree initialization Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 1/9] rcu: Panic if RCU tree can not accommodate all CPUs Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:42   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-07 18:48     ` Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 21:52       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 2/9] rcu: Remove superfluous local variable in rcu_init_geometry() Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 18:03   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 3/9] rcu: Cleanup rcu_init_geometry() code and arithmetics Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 18:08   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-07 18:59     ` Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 21:47       ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 4/9] rcu: Simplify rcu_init_geometry() capacity arithmetics Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 5/9] rcu: Limit rcu_state::levelcnt[] to RCU_NUM_LVLS items Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 6/9] rcu: Limit rcu_capacity[] size " Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 7/9] rcu: Remove unnecessary fields from rcu_state structure Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 8/9] rcu: Limit count of static data to the number of RCU levels Alexander Gordeev
2015-03-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 9/9] rcu: Simplify arithmetic to calculate number of RCU nodes Alexander Gordeev

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=20150307214702.GP5236@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=agordeev@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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