netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: vernux@us.ibm.com, andi@firstfloor.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Patrick Mullaney <pmullaney@novell.com>
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:54:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49C16D7C.3080003@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090318.143844.173112261.davem@davemloft.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1964 bytes --]

David Miller wrote:
> From: Vernon Mauery <vernux@us.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:10:33 -0700
>
>   
>> David Miller wrote:
>>     
>>> From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
>>> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:54:37 +0100
>>>
>>>       
>>>> But then again I'm not sure it's  worth it if the problem only
>>>> happens in out of tree RT.
>>>>         
>>> The list of problems that only show up with the RT kernel seems to be
>>> constantly increasing, but honestly is very surprising to me.
>>> I don't understand why we even need to be concerned about this stuff
>>> upstream, to be honest.
>>> Please reproduce this in the vanilla kernel, then get back to us.
>>>       
>> Huh? The numbers that I posted *were* from the vanilla kernel. I ran
>> the 2.6.29-rc8 kernel with lock_stat enabled.  The lock contention
>> happens on the same lock in both vanilla and -rt, it just happens
>> to be more pronounced in the -rt kernel because of the double context
>> switches that the sleeping spinlock/rt-mutexes introduce.
>>     
>
> And the double context switches are probably also why less
> natural batching and locality are achieved in the RT kernel.
>
> Isn't that true?
>   

Note that -rt doesnt typically context-switch under contention anymore
since we introduced adaptive-locks.  Also note that the contention
against the lock is still contention, regardless of whether you have -rt
or not.  Its just that the slow-path to handle the contended case for
-rt is more expensive than mainline.  However, once you have the
contention as stated, you have already lost.

We have observed the posters findings ourselves in both mainline and
-rt.  I.e. That lock doesnt scale very well once you have more than a
handful of cores.  It's certainly a great area to look at for improving
the overall stack, IMO, as I believe there is quite a bit of headroom
left to be recovered that is buried there.

Regards,
-Greg


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-03-18 21:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-18 17:24 High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 19:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-18 20:17   ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-20 23:29     ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-23  8:32       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23  8:37         ` David Miller
2009-03-23  8:50           ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-04-02 14:13           ` Herbert Xu
2009-04-02 14:15             ` Herbert Xu
2009-03-18 20:54 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 21:03   ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:10     ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:38       ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:49         ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-19  1:02           ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:54         ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2009-03-19  1:03           ` David Miller
2009-03-19  1:13             ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19  1:17               ` David Miller
2009-03-19  1:43                 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19  1:54                   ` David Miller
2009-03-19  5:49                     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19  5:58                       ` David Miller
2009-03-19 14:04                         ` [PATCH] net: reorder struct Qdisc for better SMP performance Eric Dumazet
2009-03-20  8:33                           ` David Miller
2009-03-19 13:45                   ` High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Andi Kleen
2009-03-19  3:48             ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19  5:38               ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:42                 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 20:52                   ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:50             ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19  7:15           ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-18 21:07   ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:45     ` Eilon Greenstein
2009-03-18 21:51       ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:59         ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 22:19           ` Rick Jones
2009-03-19 12:59   ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:36     ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:46     ` Andi Kleen

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=49C16D7C.3080003@novell.com \
    --to=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pmullaney@novell.com \
    --cc=vernux@us.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).