linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	williams@redhat.com, luto@kernel.org, fweisbec@redhat.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 11:20:49 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <554399D1.6010405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150501064044.GA18957@gmail.com>

On 05/01/2015 02:40 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>> This patch builds on top of these patches by Paolo:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/28/188
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/29/139
>>
>> Together with this patch I posted earlier this week, the syscall path
>> on a nohz_full cpu seems to be about 10% faster.
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/24/394
>>
>> My test is a simple microbenchmark that calls getpriority() in a loop
>> 10 million times:
>>
>> 		run time	system time
>> vanilla		5.49s		2.08s
>> __acct patch	5.21s		1.92s
>> both patches	4.88s		1.71s
>
> Just curious, what are the numbers if you don't have context tracking 
> enabled, i.e. without nohz_full?
> 
> I.e. what's the baseline we are talking about?

It's an astounding difference. This is not a kernel without nohz_full,
just a CPU without nohz_full running the same kernel I tested with
yesterday:

 		run time	system time
vanilla		5.49s		2.08s
__acct patch	5.21s		1.92s
both patches	4.88s		1.71s
CPU w/o nohz	3.12s		1.63s    <-- your numbers, mostly

What is even more interesting is that the majority of the time
difference seems to come from _user_ time, which has gone down
from around 3.4 seconds in the vanilla kernel to around 1.5 seconds
on the CPU without nohz_full enabled...

At syscall entry time, the nohz_full context tracking code is very
straightforward. We check thread_info->flags & _TIF_WORK_SYSCALL_ENTRY,
and call syscall_trace_enter_phase1, which handles USER -> KERNEL
context transition.

Syscall exit time is a convoluted mess. Both do_notify_resume and
syscall_trace_leave call exit_user() on entry and enter_user()
on exit, leaving the time spent looping around between int_with_check
and syscall_return: in entry_64.S accounted as user time.

I sent an email about this last night, it may be useful to add a
third test & function call point to the syscall return code, where
we can call user_enter() just ONCE, and remove the other context
tracking calls from that loop.

-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-01 15:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-30 21:23 [PATCH 0/3] reduce nohz_full syscall overhead by 10% riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] reduce indentation in __acct_update_integrals riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] remove local_irq_save from __acct_update_integrals riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry riel
2015-04-30 21:56   ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01  6:40   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 15:20     ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-05-01 15:59       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:03         ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01 16:21           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:26             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:34               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 18:05                 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 18:40                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 19:11                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 19:37                       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-02  5:27                         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-02 18:27                           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-03 18:41                           ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 10:35                             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-04  9:26                           ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-05-04 13:30                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 14:06                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 14:19                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 15:59                             ` question about RCU dynticks_nesting Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 18:39                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 19:39                                 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:02                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 20:13                                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:38                                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 20:53                                         ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-05  5:54                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-06  1:49                                             ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  3:44                                               ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  6:06                                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-06  6:52                                                   ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  7:01                                                     ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-07  0:59                                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-05-07 15:44                                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 19:00                               ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 19:39                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 19:59                                   ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:40                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 10:53                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 12:34                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 13:00                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 18:35                                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 21:09                                           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-06  5:41                                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 10:48                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 10:51                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 12:30                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-02  4:06                   ` [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry Mike Galbraith
2015-05-01 16:37             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:40               ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:45                 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:54                   ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 17:12                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 17:22                       ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 17:59                         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:22           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:27             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-03 13:23       ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-03 17:30         ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-03 18:24           ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-03 18:52             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-07 10:48               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:18                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-05-07 12:29                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 15:47                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-08  7:58                       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:22                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 12:44                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:49                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08  6:17                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-07 12:52                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 15:08                       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 17:47                         ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08  6:37                           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08 10:59                             ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08 11:27                               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08 12:56                                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08 13:27                                   ` Ingo Molnar

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=554399D1.6010405@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@redhat.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=williams@redhat.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).