From: "Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
To: Alexander Spyridakis <a.spyridakis@virtualopensystems.com>
Cc: mttcg@listserver.greensocs.com,
"Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"Mark Burton" <mark.burton@greensocs.com>,
"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"KONRAD Frédéric" <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] target-arm/psci.c: wake up sleeping CPUs (MTTCG)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 07:27:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87si9gxpza.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJRNFKLd7CTwrVtn5EEHKUW40aKVWY4JkbwvsUKeGPYpeyULEg@mail.gmail.com>
Alexander Spyridakis <a.spyridakis@virtualopensystems.com> writes:
> On 24 June 2015 at 17:34, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Testing with Alexander's bare metal syncronisation tests fails in MTTCG
>> leaving one CPU spinning forever waiting for the second CPU to wake up.
>> We simply need to poke the halt_cond once we have processed the PSCI
>> power on call.
>
> Thanks Alex. Works for me, also with qemu_cpu_kick(target_cpu_state)
> as Paolo mentioned.
>
> The test seems to stress the current multi-threaded implementation
> quite a lot. With 8 CPUs running, the resulting errors are in the
> range of 500 per vCPU (10 million iterations).
We need to get to the bottom of this one first as obviously the
implementation needs to bullet proof for all the various synchronisation
patterns the CPU can use.
> Performance is another issue as mentioned before, but even more
> pronounced with 8 cores. Upstream QEMU needs around 10 seconds to
> complete, with multi-threading around 100 seconds for the same test.
I'm not overly surprised as this is a high-contention test and the
additional locking implies a lot of extra overhead. It's certainly a
useful test to compare the comparative performance of the various
approaches to atomics/exclusives but I hope in real world tasks we gain
a bunch of performance for normal unlocked code running across multiple
cores.
I wonder if the perf tools can give us some insight to where the extra
latency is coming from?
>
> Best regards.
--
Alex Bennée
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-25 6:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-24 15:34 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] target-arm/psci.c: wake up sleeping CPUs (MTTCG) Alex Bennée
2015-06-24 16:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-06-24 17:18 ` Alex Bennée
2015-06-24 17:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-06-24 18:15 ` Alex Bennée
2015-06-24 19:12 ` Peter Maydell
2015-06-25 15:44 ` Andrew Jones
2015-06-26 7:06 ` Alex Bennée
2015-06-26 8:05 ` Andrew Jones
2015-06-24 23:55 ` Alexander Spyridakis
2015-06-25 6:27 ` Alex Bennée [this message]
2015-06-25 12:43 ` Frederic Konrad
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=87si9gxpza.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=a.spyridakis@virtualopensystems.com \
--cc=fred.konrad@greensocs.com \
--cc=mark.burton@greensocs.com \
--cc=mttcg@listserver.greensocs.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).