From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: tj@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, longman@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
kernel-team@cloudflare.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
mhocko@kernel.org, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] cgroup/rstat: introduce ratelimited rstat flushing
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:16:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33295077-e969-427a-badb-3e29698f5cfb@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkbNvo4nDek5HV7rpZRbARE7yc3y=ufVY5WMBkNH6oL4Mw@mail.gmail.com>
On 18/04/2024 23.00, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 4:00 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer<hawk@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On 18/04/2024 04.21, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:51 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer<hawk@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>> This patch aims to reduce userspace-triggered pressure on the global
>>>> cgroup_rstat_lock by introducing a mechanism to limit how often reading
>>>> stat files causes cgroup rstat flushing.
>>>>
[...]
> Taking a step back, I think this series is trying to address two
> issues in one go: interrupt handling latency and lock contention.
Yes, patch 2 and 3 are essentially independent and address two different
aspects.
> While both are related because reducing flushing reduces irq
> disablement, I think it would be better if we can fix that issue
> separately with a more fundamental solution (e.g. using a mutex or
> dropping the lock at each CPU boundary).
>
> After that, we can more clearly evaluate the lock contention problem
> with data purely about flushing latency, without taking into
> consideration the irq handling problem.
>
> Does this make sense to you?
Yes, make sense.
So, you are suggesting we start with the mutex change? (patch 2)
(which still needs some adjustments/tuning)
This make sense to me, as there are likely many solutions to reducing
the pressure on the lock.
With the tracepoint patch in-place, I/we can measure the pressure on the
lock, and I plan to do this across our CF fleet. Then we can slowly
work on improving lock contention and evaluate this on our fleets.
--Jesper
p.s.
Setting expectations:
- Going on vacation today, so will resume work after 29th April.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-19 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-16 17:51 [PATCH v1 0/3] cgroup/rstat: global cgroup_rstat_lock changes Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-16 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] cgroup/rstat: add cgroup_rstat_lock helpers and tracepoints Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-16 21:36 ` Tejun Heo
2024-04-18 8:00 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-23 16:53 ` Simon Horman
2024-04-29 11:36 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-29 17:48 ` Simon Horman
2024-04-16 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] cgroup/rstat: convert cgroup_rstat_lock back to mutex Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-18 2:19 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-18 9:02 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-18 14:49 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-04-18 20:39 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-19 13:15 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-19 16:11 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-04-19 19:21 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-18 20:38 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-16 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] cgroup/rstat: introduce ratelimited rstat flushing Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-18 2:21 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-18 11:00 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2024-04-18 15:49 ` Shakeel Butt
2024-04-18 21:00 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-18 21:15 ` Tejun Heo
2024-04-18 21:22 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-18 21:32 ` Tejun Heo
2024-04-19 10:16 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2024-04-19 19:25 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-04-16 21:38 ` [PATCH v1 0/3] cgroup/rstat: global cgroup_rstat_lock changes Tejun Heo
2024-04-18 2:13 ` Yosry Ahmed
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=33295077-e969-427a-badb-3e29698f5cfb@kernel.org \
--to=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@cloudflare.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.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