qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	ming.lei@canonical.com, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 3/3] qemu-coroutine: use a ring per thread for the pool
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 14:17:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <547875CF.8000207@kamp.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54786E52.6050209@redhat.com>

Am 28.11.2014 um 13:45 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>
> On 28/11/2014 13:39, Peter Lieven wrote:
>> Am 28.11.2014 um 13:26 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>>> On 28/11/2014 12:46, Peter Lieven wrote:
>>>>> I get:
>>>>> Run operation 40000000 iterations 9.883958 s, 4046K operations/s, 247ns per coroutine
>>>> Ok, understood, it "steals" the whole pool, right? Isn't that bad if we have more
>>>> than one thread in need of a lot of coroutines?
>>> Overall the algorithm is expected to adapt.  The N threads contribute to
>>> the global release pool, so the pool will fill up N times faster than if
>>> you had only one thread.  There can be some variance, which is why the
>>> maximum size of the pool is twice the threshold (and probably could be
>>> tuned better).
>>>
>>> Benchmarks are needed on real I/O too, of course, especially with high
>>> queue depth.
>> Yes, cool. The atomic operations are a bit tricky at the first glance ;-)
>>
>> Question:
>>  Why is the pool_size increment atomic and the set to zero not?
> Because the set to zero is not a read-modify-write operation, so it is
> always atomic.  It's just not sequentially-consistent (see
> docs/atomics.txt for some info on what that means).
>
>> Idea:
>>  If the release_pool is full why not put the coroutine in the thread alloc_pool instead of throwing it away? :-)
> Because you can only waste 64 coroutines per thread.  But numbers cannot
> be sneezed at, so it's worth doing it as a separate patch.
>
>> Run operation 40000000 iterations 9.057805 s, 4416K operations/s, 226ns per coroutine
>>
>> diff --git a/qemu-coroutine.c b/qemu-coroutine.c
>> index 6bee354..edea162 100644
>> --- a/qemu-coroutine.c
>> +++ b/qemu-coroutine.c
>> @@ -25,8 +25,9 @@ enum {
>>  
>>  /** Free list to speed up creation */
>>  static QSLIST_HEAD(, Coroutine) release_pool = QSLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(pool);
>> -static unsigned int pool_size;
>> +static unsigned int release_pool_size;
>>  static __thread QSLIST_HEAD(, Coroutine) alloc_pool = QSLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(pool);
>> +static __thread unsigned int alloc_pool_size;
>>  
>>  /* The GPrivate is only used to invoke coroutine_pool_cleanup.  */
>>  static void coroutine_pool_cleanup(void *value);
>> @@ -39,12 +40,12 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry)
>>      if (CONFIG_COROUTINE_POOL) {
>>          co = QSLIST_FIRST(&alloc_pool);
>>          if (!co) {
>> -            if (pool_size > POOL_BATCH_SIZE) {
>> -                /* This is not exact; there could be a little skew between pool_size
>> +            if (release_pool_size > POOL_BATCH_SIZE) {
>> +                /* This is not exact; there could be a little skew between release_pool_size
>>                   * and the actual size of alloc_pool.  But it is just a heuristic,
>>                   * it does not need to be perfect.
>>                   */
>> -                pool_size = 0;
>> +                alloc_pool_size = atomic_fetch_and(&release_pool_size, 0);
>>                  QSLIST_MOVE_ATOMIC(&alloc_pool, &release_pool);
>>                  co = QSLIST_FIRST(&alloc_pool);
>>  
>> @@ -53,6 +54,8 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry)
>>                   */
>>                  g_private_set(&dummy_key, &dummy_key);
>>              }
>> +        } else {
>> +            alloc_pool_size--;
>>          }
>>          if (co) {
>>              QSLIST_REMOVE_HEAD(&alloc_pool, pool_next);
>> @@ -71,10 +74,15 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry)
>>  static void coroutine_delete(Coroutine *co)
>>  {
>>      if (CONFIG_COROUTINE_POOL) {
>> -        if (pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE * 2) {
>> +        if (release_pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE * 2) {
>>              co->caller = NULL;
>>              QSLIST_INSERT_HEAD_ATOMIC(&release_pool, co, pool_next);
>> -            atomic_inc(&pool_size);
>> +            atomic_inc(&release_pool_size);
>> +            return;
>> +        } else if (alloc_pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE) {
>> +            co->caller = NULL;
>> +            QSLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&alloc_pool, co, pool_next);
>> +            alloc_pool_size++;
>>              return;
>>          }
>>      }
>>
>>
>> Bug?:
>>  The release_pool is not cleanup up on termination I think.
> That's not necessary, it is global.

I don't see where you iterate over release_pool and destroy all coroutines?

Maybe just add back the old destructor with s/pool/release_pool/g

Peter

Peter

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-28 13:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-27 10:27 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] qemu-coroutine: use a ring per thread for the pool Peter Lieven
2014-11-27 10:27 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/3] Revert "coroutine: make pool size dynamic" Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:42   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2014-11-28 12:45     ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-27 10:27 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/3] block/block-backend.c: remove coroutine pool reservation Peter Lieven
2014-11-27 10:27 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 3/3] qemu-coroutine: use a ring per thread for the pool Peter Lieven
2014-11-27 16:40   ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28  8:13     ` Peter Lieven
     [not found]       ` <54784E55.6060405@redhat.com>
2014-11-28 10:37         ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 11:14           ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 11:21             ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 11:23               ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 11:27                 ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 11:32                 ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 11:46                   ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:26                     ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 12:39                       ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:45                         ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 12:49                           ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:56                             ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 13:17                           ` Peter Lieven [this message]
2014-11-28 14:17                             ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 20:11                               ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 13:13                         ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:21                   ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-28 12:26                     ` Peter Lieven
2014-11-28 12:40   ` Stefan Hajnoczi

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=547875CF.8000207@kamp.de \
    --to=pl@kamp.de \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.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).