From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] Add rcu_sync infrastructure to avoid _expedited() in percpu-rwsem
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 01:35:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150711233535.GA829@redhat.com> (raw)
Hello,
Let me make another attempt to push rcu_sync and add a _simple_
improvment into percpu-rwsem. It already has another user (cgroups)
and I think it can have more. Peter has some use-cases. sb->s_writers
(which afaics is buggy btw) can be turned into percpu-rwsem too I think.
Linus, I am mostly trying to convince you. Nobody else objected so far.
Could you please comment?
Peter, if you agree with 5-7, can I add your Signed-off-by's ?
To me, the most annoying problem with percpu_rw_semaphore is
synchronize_sched_expedited() which is called twice by every
down_write/up_write. I think it would be really nice to avoid it.
Let's start with the simple test-case,
#!/bin/bash
perf probe -x /lib/libc.so.6 syscall
for i in {1..1000}; do
echo 1 >| /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/probe_libc/syscall/enable
echo 0 >| /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/probe_libc/syscall/enable
done
It needs ~ 13.5 seconds (2 CPUs, KVM). If we simply replace
synchronize_sched_expedited() with synchronize_sched() it takes
~ 67.5 seconds. This is not good.
With these patches it takes around 13.3 seconds again (a little
bit faster), and it doesn't use _expedited. synchronize_sched()
is called 1-2 (max 3) times in average. And now it does not
disturb the whole system.
And just in case, I also measured
for (i = 0; i < 1000000; ++i) {
percpu_down_write(&dup_mmap_sem);
percpu_up_write(&dup_mmap_sem);
}
and it runs more than 1.5 times faster (to remind, only 2 CPUs),
but this is not that interesting, I agree.
And note that the actual change in percpu-rwsem is really simple,
and imo it even makes the code simpler. (the last patch is off-
topic cleanup).
So the only complication is rcu_sync itself. But, rightly or not (I
am obviously biased), I believe this new rcu infrastructure is natural
and useful, and I think it can have more users too.
And. We can do more improvements in rcu_sync and percpu-rwsem, and
I don't only mean other optimizations from Peter. In particular, we
can extract the "wait for gp pass" from rcu_sync_enter() into another
helper, we can teach percpu_down_write() to allow multiple writers,
and more.
Oleg.
include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h | 3 +-
include/linux/rcusync.h | 57 +++++++++++++++
kernel/locking/percpu-rwsem.c | 78 ++++++---------------
kernel/rcu/Makefile | 2 +-
kernel/rcu/sync.c | 152 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5 files changed, 235 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
next reply other threads:[~2015-07-11 23:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-11 23:35 Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-07-11 23:35 ` [PATCH 1/7] rcu: Create rcu_sync infrastructure Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-15 18:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-15 18:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-15 18:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-15 19:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-15 19:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-15 18:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:35 ` [PATCH 2/7] rcusync: Introduce struct rcu_sync_ops Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:35 ` [PATCH 3/7] rcusync: Add the CONFIG_PROVE_RCU checks Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:35 ` [PATCH 4/7] rcusync: Introduce rcu_sync_dtor() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:36 ` [PATCH 5/7] percpu-rwsem: change it to rely on rss_sync infrastructure Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-15 18:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-15 18:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:36 ` [PATCH 6/7] percpu-rwsem: fix the comments outdated by rcu_sync Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:36 ` [PATCH 7/7] percpu-rwsem: cleanup the lockdep annotations in percpu_down_read() Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-11 23:47 ` [PATCH 0/7] Add rcu_sync infrastructure to avoid _expedited() in percpu-rwsem Linus Torvalds
2015-07-15 18:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-15 19:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-15 21:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-17 23:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-07-17 23:47 ` 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=20150711233535.GA829@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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