public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 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>,
	Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Allow RT tasks to cache one sigqueue struct
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:57:31 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1pn06oeno.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sg524z6t.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (Thomas Gleixner's message of "Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:54:18 +0100")

Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes:

> On Thu, Mar 04 2021 at 21:58, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 04 2021 at 13:04, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes:
>>>>
>>>> We could of course do the caching unconditionally for all tasks.
>>>
>>> Is there any advantage to only doing this for realtime tasks?
>>
>> It was mostly to avoid tons of cached entries hanging around all over
>> the place. So I limited it to the case which the RT users deeply cared
>> about. Also related to the accounting question below.
>>
>>> If not it probably makes sense to do the caching for all tasks.
>>>
>>> I am wondering if we want to count the cached sigqueue structure to the
>>> users rt signal rlimit?
>>
>> That makes some sense, but that's a user visible change as a single
>> signal will up the count for a tasks lifetime while today it is removed
>> from accounting again once the signal is delivered. So that needs some
>> thought.
>
> Thought more about it. To make this accounting useful we'd need:
>
>   - a seperate user::sigqueue_cached counter
>   - a seperate RLIMIT_SIGQUEUE_CACHED
>
> Then you need to think about the defaults. Any signal heavy application
> will want this enabled and obviously automagically.
>
> Also there is an argument not to have this due to possible pointless
> memory consumption.
>
> But what are we talking about? 80 bytes worth of memory per task in the
> worst case. Which is compared to the rest of a task's memory consumption
> just noise.
>
> Looking at some statistics from a devel system there are less than 10
> items cached when the machine is fully idle after boot. During a kernel
> compile the cache utilization goes up to ~150 at max (make -j128 and 64
> CPUs). What's interesting is the allocation statistics after boot and
> full kernel compile:
>
>   from slab:            23996
>   from task cache:	52223
>
> A typical pattern there is:
>
>     <ls>-58490   [010] d..2  7765.664198: __sigqueue_alloc: 58488 from slab ffff8881132df460 10
>     <ls>-58488   [002] d..1  7765.664294: __sigqueue_free.part.35: cache ffff8881132df460 10
>     <ls>-58488   [002] d..2  7765.665146: __sigqueue_alloc: 1149 from cache ffff8881103dc550 10
>      bash-1149   [000] d..2  7765.665220: exit_task_sighand: free ffff8881132df460 8 9
>      bash-1149   [000] d..1  7765.665662: __sigqueue_free.part.35: cache ffff8881103dc550 9
>
> 58488 grabs the sigqueue from bash's task cache and bash sticks it back
> in. Lather, rinse and repeat. 
>
> IMO, not bothering with an extra counter and rlimit plus the required
> atomic operations is just fine and having this for all tasks
> unconditionally looks like a clear win.
>
> I'll post an updated version of this soonish.

That looks like a good analysis.

I see that there is a sigqueue_cachep.  As I recall there are per cpu
caches and all kinds of other good stuff when using kmem_cache_alloc.

Are those goodies falling down?

I am just a little unclear on why a slab allocation is sufficiently
problematic that we want to avoid it.

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-10 21:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-03 14:20 [PATCH] signal: Allow RT tasks to cache one sigqueue struct Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-03-03 15:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-04 21:10   ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-05 10:57     ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-04 21:14   ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-03 22:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04  8:11   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-03-04 15:02     ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-04 19:04       ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04 20:58         ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-10 18:54           ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-10 21:57             ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2021-03-10 23:56               ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 12:45                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 14:20                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-03-11 16:32                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-04 19:01     ` Eric W. Biederman
     [not found] <draft-874khk5yed.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
2021-03-10  8:57 ` Thomas Gleixner

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=m1pn06oeno.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --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=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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