From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, "Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
Nitin Tekchandani <nitin.tekchandani@intel.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: Make tg->load_avg per node
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 21:33:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230404133348.GA50663@ziqianlu-desk2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZCve4JaH8EhxBcwQ@chenyu5-mobl1>
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 04:25:04PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> On 2023-03-27 at 13:39:55 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote:
> > When using sysbench to benchmark Postgres in a single docker instance
> > with sysbench's nr_threads set to nr_cpu, it is observed there are times
> > update_cfs_group() and update_load_avg() shows noticeable overhead on
> > cpus of one node of a 2sockets/112core/224cpu Intel Sapphire Rapids:
> >
> > 10.01% 9.86% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_cfs_group
> > 7.84% 7.43% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_load_avg
> >
> > While cpus of the other node normally sees a lower cycle percent:
> >
> > 4.46% 4.36% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_cfs_group
> > 4.02% 3.40% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_load_avg
> >
> > Annotate shows the cycles are mostly spent on accessing tg->load_avg
> > with update_load_avg() being the write side and update_cfs_group() being
> > the read side.
> >
> > The reason why only cpus of one node has bigger overhead is: task_group
> > is allocated on demand from a slab and whichever cpu happens to do the
> > allocation, the allocated tg will be located on that node and accessing
> > to tg->load_avg will have a lower cost for cpus on the same node and
> > a higer cost for cpus of the remote node.
> >
> > Tim Chen told me that PeterZ once mentioned a way to solve a similar
> > problem by making a counter per node so do the same for tg->load_avg.
> > After this change, the worst number I saw during a 5 minutes run from
> > both nodes are:
> >
> > 2.77% 2.11% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_load_avg
> > 2.72% 2.59% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] update_cfs_group
> >
> The same issue was found when running netperf on this platform.
> According to the perf profile:
Thanks for the info!
>
> 11.90% 11.84% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] update_cfs_group
> 9.79% 9.43% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] update_load_avg
>
> these two functions took quite some cycles.
>
> 1. cpufreq governor set to performance, turbo disabled, C6 disabled
I didn't make any changes to the above and then tried netperf as you
described below, using UDP_RR, and the cycle percent of update_cfs_group
is even worse on my SPR system:
v6.3-rc5:
update_cfs_group()%: 27.39% on node0, 31.18% on node1
wakeups[0]: 5623199
wakeups[1]: 7919937
migrations[0]: 3871773
migrations[1]: 5606894
v6.3-rc5 + this_patch:
update_cfs_group()%: 24.12% on node0, 26.15% on node1
wakeups[0]: 13575203
wakeups[1]: 10749893
migrations[0]: 9153060
migrations[1]: 7508095
This patch helps a little bit, but not much. Will take a closer look.
> 2. launches 224 instances of netperf, and each instance is:
> netperf -4 -H 127.0.0.1 -t UDP_RR/TCP_RR -c -C -l 100 &
> 3. perf record -ag sleep 4
>
> Also the test script could be downloaded via
> https://github.com/yu-chen-surf/schedtests.git
Thanks,
Aaron
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-04 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 5:39 [RFC PATCH] sched/fair: Make tg->load_avg per node Aaron Lu
2023-03-27 14:45 ` Chen Yu
2023-03-28 6:42 ` Aaron Lu
2023-03-28 12:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-03-28 12:56 ` Aaron Lu
2023-03-29 12:36 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-03-29 13:54 ` Aaron Lu
2023-03-30 17:45 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-03-30 19:51 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-03-31 4:06 ` Aaron Lu
2023-03-31 15:48 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2023-04-03 7:53 ` Aaron Lu
2023-04-05 21:04 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-04-12 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-04-20 20:52 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-04-21 15:05 ` Aaron Lu
2023-05-03 19:41 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-05-04 10:27 ` Aaron Lu
2023-05-16 7:50 ` Aaron Lu
2023-05-16 8:57 ` Chen Yu
2023-05-16 11:32 ` Aaron Lu
2023-03-29 14:55 ` Chen Yu
2023-04-04 8:25 ` Chen Yu
2023-04-04 13:33 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2023-04-04 15:15 ` Aaron Lu
2023-04-04 15:37 ` Chen Yu
2023-04-05 21:31 ` Daniel Jordan
2023-04-12 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-04-12 13:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-04-12 14:11 ` Aaron Lu
2023-04-12 14:01 ` Aaron Lu
2023-04-22 4:01 ` Chen Yu
2023-04-22 6:04 ` Aaron Lu
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=20230404133348.GA50663@ziqianlu-desk2 \
--to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nitin.tekchandani@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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