public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
	edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
	oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging normal ones
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 09:47:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150702074719.GA27230@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150701200936.GP3717@linux.vnet.ibm.com>


* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 07:02:42PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 09:17:05AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 04:17:10PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > > > 74b51ee152b6 ("ACPI / osl: speedup grace period in acpi_os_map_cleanup")
> > > 
> > > Really???
> > > 
> > > I am not concerned about this one.  After all, one of the first things that 
> > > people do for OS-jitter-sensitive workloads is to get rid of binary blobs.  
> > > And any runtime use of ACPI as well.  And let's face it, if your 
> > > latency-sensitive workload is using either binary blobs or ACPI, you have 
> > > already completely lost.  Therefore, an additional expedited grace period 
> > > cannot possibly cause you to lose any more.
> > 
> > This isn't solely about rt etc.. this call is a generic facility used by 
> > however many consumers. A normal workstation/server could run into it at 
> > relatively high frequency depending on its workload.
> > 
> > Even on not latency sensitive workloads I think hammering all active CPUs is 
> > bad behaviour. Remember that a typical server class machine easily has more 
> > than 32 CPUs these days.
> 
> Well, that certainly is one reason for the funnel locking, sequence counters, 
> etc., keeping the overhead bounded despite large numbers of CPUs.  So I don't 
> believe that a non-RT/non-HPC workload is going to notice.

So I think Peter's concern is that we should not be offering/promoting APIs that 
are easy to add, hard to remove/convert - especially if we _know_ they eventually 
have to be converted. That model does not scale, it piles up increasing amounts of 
crud.

Also, there will be a threshold over which it will be increasingly harder to make 
hard-rt promises, because so much seemingly mundane functionality will be using 
these APIs. The big plus of -rt is that it's out of the box hard RT - if people 
are able to control their environment carefully they can use RTAI or so. I.e. it 
directly cuts into the usability of Linux in certain segments.

Death by a thousand cuts and such.

And it's not like it's that hard to stem the flow of algorithmic sloppiness at the 
source, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-07-02  7:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-30 21:48 [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging normal ones Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 21:48 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/5] rcu: Prepare for expedited GP driving normal GP Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 21:48   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 2/5] rcu: Short-circuit normal GPs via expedited GPs Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:03     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 13:42       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 20:59       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:05     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 13:41       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 13:48         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 14:03           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 12:03             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-02 14:06               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 16:48                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-02 19:35                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-06 14:52                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-30 21:48   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 3/5] rcutorture: Ensure that normal GPs advance without " Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 21:48   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 4/5] rcu: Wake grace-period kthread at end of expedited grace period Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 21:48   ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 5/5] rcu: Limit expedited helping to every 10 ms or every 4th GP Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 21:56     ` Eric Dumazet
2015-06-30 22:10       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:07     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 13:45       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 19:30       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 22:00 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging normal ones josh
2015-06-30 22:12   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-30 23:46     ` josh
2015-07-01  0:15       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01  0:42         ` Josh Triplett
2015-07-01  3:37           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:12             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 14:01               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 14:08                 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-07-01 15:58                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 15:43             ` Josh Triplett
2015-07-01 15:59               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 10:09       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 10:55         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 14:00           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 14:17             ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 16:17               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 17:02                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-01 20:09                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-01 21:20                     ` josh
2015-07-01 21:49                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02  7:47                     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-07-02 13:58                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 18:35                         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-02 18:47                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2015-07-02 19:23                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02 21:07                               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2015-07-02 19:22                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02  1:11                 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02  1:34                   ` josh
2015-07-02  1:59                     ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02  2:18                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-02  2:50                         ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-02  3:15                           ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20150702074719.GA27230@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --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