From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zilstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
byungchul.park@lge.com, kernel-team@android.com,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rcu: Speed up calling of RCU tasks callbacks
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 20:02:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180521030225.GA3803@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180521004324.68371-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 05:43:24PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>
>
> RCU tasks callbacks can take atleast 1 second before the callbacks are
> executed. This happens even if the hold-out tasks enter their quiescent states
> quickly. I noticed this when I was testing trampoline callback execution.
>
> To test the trampoline freeing, I wrote a simple script:
> cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/
> echo '__schedule_bug:traceon' > set_ftrace_filter;
> echo '!__schedule_bug:traceon' > set_ftrace_filter;
>
> In the background I had simple bash while loop:
> while [ 1 ]; do x=1; done &
>
> Total time of completion of above commands in seconds:
>
> With this patch:
> real 0m0.179s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.054s
>
> Without this patch:
> real 0m1.098s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.053s
>
> That's a great than 6X speed up in performance. In order to accomplish
> this, I am waiting for HZ/10 time before entering the hold-out checking
> loop. The loop still preserves its checking of held tasks every 1 second
> as before, incase this first test doesn't succeed.
>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Seems straightforward enough. The commit log needs a bit of cleanup
("atleast", "great than", ...).
Steve, thoughts? Any reason why this would be a problem?
Thanx, Paul
> Cc: Peter Zilstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: byungchul.park@lge.com
> Cc: kernel-team@android.com
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> ---
> Changes since v1->v2:
> - Changed total wait time to HZ/10 instead of 2 jiffies
> - Updated the commands to reproduce issue
>
> kernel/rcu/update.c | 12 +++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/update.c b/kernel/rcu/update.c
> index 5783bdf86e5a..a28698e44b08 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/update.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/update.c
> @@ -743,6 +743,12 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_tasks_kthread(void *arg)
> */
> synchronize_srcu(&tasks_rcu_exit_srcu);
>
> + /*
> + * Wait a little bit incase held tasks are released
> + * during their next timer ticks.
> + */
> + schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ/10);
> +
> /*
> * Each pass through the following loop scans the list
> * of holdout tasks, removing any that are no longer
> @@ -755,7 +761,6 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_tasks_kthread(void *arg)
> int rtst;
> struct task_struct *t1;
>
> - schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ);
> rtst = READ_ONCE(rcu_task_stall_timeout);
> needreport = rtst > 0 &&
> time_after(jiffies, lastreport + rtst);
> @@ -768,6 +773,11 @@ static int __noreturn rcu_tasks_kthread(void *arg)
> check_holdout_task(t, needreport, &firstreport);
> cond_resched();
> }
> +
> + if (list_empty(&rcu_tasks_holdouts))
> + break;
> +
> + schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ);
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 2.17.0.441.gb46fe60e1d-goog
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-21 3:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-21 0:43 [PATCH v2] rcu: Speed up calling of RCU tasks callbacks Joel Fernandes
2018-05-21 3:02 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
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=20180521030225.GA3803@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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