From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Guo, Wangyang" <wangyang.guo@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Benjamin Lei <benjamin.lei@intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Tianyou Li <tianyou.li@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
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>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Avoid false sharing in nohz struct
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 12:57:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <917c1771-5249-4c10-9ecf-699cdd323cd9@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7297e5e6-ae5a-42dc-8495-fddbb87ddf87@intel.com>
On 12/22/25 7:51 AM, Guo, Wangyang wrote:
> On 12/21/2025 9:05 PM, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
>> Hi Wangyang,
>>
>> On 12/11/25 11:26 AM, Wangyang Guo wrote:
>>> There are two potential false sharing issue in nohz struct:
>>> 1. idle_cpus_mask is a read-mostly field, but share the same cacheline
>>> with frequently updated nr_cpus.
>>
>> Updates to idle_cpus_mask is not same cacheline. it is updated
>> alongside nr_cpus.
>>
>> with CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y, idle_cpus_mask is a pointer to the actual mask.
>> Updates to it happen in another cacheline.
>>
>> with CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=n, idle_cpus_mask is on the stack and its length
>> depends on NR_CPUS. typical value being 512/2048/8192 it can span a few
>> cachelines. So updates to it likely in different cacheline compared to
>> nr_cpus.
>>
>> see https://lore.kernel.org/all/aS6bK4ad-wO2fsoo@gmail.com/
>>
> This patch is mainly target for idle_cpus_mask as a pointer, which is
> default for many distro OS.
>
Not all archs.
>>
>> Likely in your case, nr_cpus updates are the costly ones.
>> Try below and see if it helps to fix your issue too.
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251201183146.74443-1-sshegde@linux.ibm.com/
>> I Should send out new version soon.
>>
>>> 2. Data followed by nohz still share the same cacheline and has
>>> potential false sharing issue.
>>>
>>
>> How does your patch handle this?
>> I don't see any other struct apart from nohz being changed.
>
> The data follow by nohz is implicit and determined by compiler.
> For example, this is the layout from /proc/kallsyms in my machine:
> ffffffff88600d40 b nohz
> ffffffff88600d68 B arch_needs_tick_broadcast
> ffffffff88600d6c b __key.264
> ffffffff88600d6c b __key.265
> ffffffff88600d70 b dl_generation
> ffffffff88600d78 b sched_clock_irqtime
>
> What we can do is placing read-mostly `idle_cpus_mask` pointer in a new
> cacheline, so data followed by nohz would not be affected by nr_cpus.
>
That's a concern. If it is compiler dependent, then sometime it helps, sometime it wont.
It should done other way around rather than changing the nohz.
If there is structure which has a lot of read/updates, it should go into its
own cacheline rather.
i.e in your case sched_clock_irqtime should go into its own cacheline.
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/cputime.c b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
index 4f97896887ec..29f9438f9f03 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/cputime.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/cputime.c
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
*/
DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct irqtime, cpu_irqtime);
-int sched_clock_irqtime;
+int sched_clock_irqtime __cacheline_aligned;
void enable_sched_clock_irqtime(void)
{
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-23 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-11 5:56 [PATCH] sched/fair: Avoid false sharing in nohz struct Wangyang Guo
2025-12-21 13:05 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-12-22 2:21 ` Guo, Wangyang
2025-12-23 7:27 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-12-23 8:03 ` Guo, Wangyang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-12-19 1:38 Shubhang Kaushik Prasanna Kumar
2025-12-19 13:56 ` Guo, Wangyang
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=917c1771-5249-4c10-9ecf-699cdd323cd9@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=benjamin.lei@intel.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=wangyang.guo@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