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 --]
next prev 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).