From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Levin Alexander <alexander.levin@verizon.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] softirq: Account time and iteration stats per vector
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:34:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180112143448.GA1950@lerouge> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iKbJ6XABv291URQCipDOgNzYpHmUVi6FsPSTeYJXMdaKA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:22:58PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
> > {
> > - unsigned long end = jiffies + MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME;
> > + struct softirq_stat *sstat = this_cpu_ptr(&softirq_stat_cpu);
> > unsigned long old_flags = current->flags;
> > - int max_restart = MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART;
> > struct softirq_action *h;
> > bool in_hardirq;
> > - __u32 pending;
> > + __u32 pending, overrun = 0;
> > int softirq_bit;
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -262,6 +273,7 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
> > __local_bh_disable_ip(_RET_IP_, SOFTIRQ_OFFSET);
> > in_hardirq = lockdep_softirq_start();
> >
> > + memzero_explicit(sstat, sizeof(*sstat));
>
> If you clear sstat here, it means it does not need to be a per cpu
> variable, but an automatic one (defined on the stack)
That's right. But I thought it was bit large for the stack:
struct {
u64 time;
u64 count;
} [NR_SOFTIRQS]
although arguably we are either using softirq stack or a fresh task one.
>
> I presume we need a per cpu var to track cpu usage on last time window.
>
> ( typical case of 99,000 IRQ per second, one packet delivered per IRQ,
> 10 usec spent per packet)
So should I account, like, per vector stats in a jiffy window for example? And apply
the limits on top of that?
>
>
>
> > restart:
> > /* Reset the pending bitmask before enabling irqs */
> > set_softirq_pending(0);
> > @@ -271,8 +283,10 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
> > h = softirq_vec;
> >
> > while ((softirq_bit = ffs(pending))) {
> > + struct vector_stat *vstat;
> > unsigned int vec_nr;
> > int prev_count;
> > + u64 startime;
> >
> > h += softirq_bit - 1;
> >
> > @@ -280,10 +294,18 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
> > prev_count = preempt_count();
> >
> > kstat_incr_softirqs_this_cpu(vec_nr);
> > + vstat = &sstat->stat[vec_nr];
> >
> > trace_softirq_entry(vec_nr);
> > + startime = local_clock();
> > h->action(h);
> > + vstat->time += local_clock() - startime;
>
> You might store local_clock() in a variable, so that we do not call
> local_clock() two times per ->action() called.
So you mean I keep the second local_clock() call for the next first call in the while
iteration, right? Yep that sounds possible.
>
>
> > + vstat->count++;
> > trace_softirq_exit(vec_nr);
> > +
> > + if (vstat->time > MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME || vstat->count > MAX_SOFTIRQ_RESTART)
>
> If we trust local_clock() to be precise enough, we do not need to
> track vstat->count anymore.
That's what I was thinking. Should I keep MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME to 2 ms BTW? It looks a bit long
to me.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-12 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-12 5:35 [RFC PATCH 0/2] softirq: Per vector threading Frederic Weisbecker
2018-01-12 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] softirq: Account time and iteration stats per vector Frederic Weisbecker
2018-01-12 6:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-01-12 14:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2018-01-12 18:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-01-12 18:54 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2018-01-12 5:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] softirq: Per vector thread deferment Frederic Weisbecker
2018-01-12 6:27 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2018-01-12 9:07 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-01-12 14:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20180112143448.GA1950@lerouge \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.levin@verizon.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dima@arista.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rrendec@arista.com \
--cc=sgruszka@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=wanpeng.li@hotmail.com \
/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