* xen_evtchn_do_upcall
@ 2012-10-22 1:51 David Xu
2012-10-24 9:23 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Xu @ 2012-10-22 1:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3463 bytes --]
Hi,
Is anybody know the purpose of this method (xen_evtchn_do_upcall)? When I
run a user level application involved in TCP receiving and the SoftIRQ for
eth0 on the same CPU core, everything is OK. But if I run them on 2
different cores, there will be xen_evtchn_do_upcall() existing (maybe when
the local_bh_disable<http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~baker/devices/lxr/http/ident?i=local_bh_disable>()
or local_bh_enable<http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~baker/devices/lxr/http/ident?i=local_bh_disable>()
is called) in __inet_lookup_established() routine which costs longer time
than the first scenario. Is it due to the synchronization issue between
process context and softirq context? Thanks for any reply.
1) | __inet_lookup_established() {
1) | xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
1) 0.054 us | exit_idle();
1) | irq_enter() {
1) | rcu_irq_enter() {
1) 0.102 us | rcu_exit_nohz();
1) 0.431 us | }
1) 0.064 us | idle_cpu();
1) 1.152 us | }
1) | __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
1) 0.119 us | irq_to_desc();
1) | handle_edge_irq() {
1) 0.107 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) | ack_dynirq() {
1) | evtchn_from_irq() {
1) | info_for_irq() {
1) | irq_get_irq_data() {
1) 0.052 us | irq_to_desc();
1) 0.418 us | }
1) 0.782 us | }
1) 1.135 us | }
1) 0.049 us | irq_move_irq();
1) 1.800 us | }
1) | handle_irq_event() {
1) 0.161 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) | handle_irq_event_percpu() {
1) | xennet_interrupt() {
1) 0.125 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
1) | xennet_tx_buf_gc() {
1) 0.079 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
1) 0.050 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
1) 0.069 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
1) 0.055 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
1) 0.472 us | }
1) 0.049 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
1) 0.058 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
1) 0.058 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
1) 0.050 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
1) 0.456 us | }
1) 3.714 us | }
1) 0.102 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
1) 4.857 us | }
1) 0.061 us | note_interrupt();
1) 5.571 us | }
1) 0.054 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) 6.707 us | }
1) 0.083 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) + 10.083 us | }
1) + 10.985 us | }
1) | irq_exit() {
1) | rcu_irq_exit() {
1) 0.087 us | rcu_enter_nohz();
1) 0.429 us | }
1) 0.049 us | idle_cpu();
1) 1.088 us | }
1) + 14.551 us | }
1) 0.191 us | } /* __inet_lookup_established */
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4585 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xen_evtchn_do_upcall
2012-10-22 1:51 xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
@ 2012-10-24 9:23 ` Ian Campbell
2012-10-24 13:39 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2012-10-24 9:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Xu; +Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Mon, 2012-10-22 at 02:51 +0100, David Xu wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Is anybody know the purpose of this method (xen_evtchn_do_upcall)?
It is the callback used to inject event channels events (i.e. IRQs) into
the guest. You would expect to see it at the base of any stack trace
taken from interrupt context.
> When I run a user level application involved in TCP receiving and the
> SoftIRQ for eth0 on the same CPU core, everything is OK. But if I run
> them on 2 different cores, there will be xen_evtchn_do_upcall()
> existing (maybe when the local_bh_disable() or local_bh_enable() is
> called)
it would not be unusual to get an interrupt immediately after
re-enabling interrupts.
> in __inet_lookup_established() routine which costs longer time than
> the first scenario. Is it due to the synchronization issue between
> process context and softirq context? Thanks for any reply.
>
>
> 1) | __inet_lookup_established() {
> 1) | xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
> 1) 0.054 us | exit_idle();
> 1) | irq_enter() {
> 1) | rcu_irq_enter() {
> 1) 0.102 us | rcu_exit_nohz();
> 1) 0.431 us | }
> 1) 0.064 us | idle_cpu();
> 1) 1.152 us | }
> 1) | __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
> 1) 0.119 us | irq_to_desc();
> 1) | handle_edge_irq() {
> 1) 0.107 us | _raw_spin_lock();
> 1) | ack_dynirq() {
> 1) | evtchn_from_irq() {
> 1) | info_for_irq() {
> 1) | irq_get_irq_data() {
> 1) 0.052 us | irq_to_desc();
> 1) 0.418 us | }
> 1) 0.782 us | }
> 1) 1.135 us | }
> 1) 0.049 us | irq_move_irq();
> 1) 1.800 us | }
> 1) | handle_irq_event() {
> 1) 0.161 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
> 1) | handle_irq_event_percpu() {
> 1) | xennet_interrupt() {
> 1) 0.125 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
> 1) | xennet_tx_buf_gc() {
> 1) 0.079 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
> 1) 0.050 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
> 1) 0.069 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
> 1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
> 1) 0.055 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
> 1) 0.472 us | }
> 1) 0.049 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
> 1) 0.058 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
> 1) 0.058 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
> 1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
> 1) 0.050 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
> 1) 0.456 us | }
> 1) 3.714 us | }
> 1) 0.102 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
> 1) 4.857 us | }
> 1) 0.061 us | note_interrupt();
> 1) 5.571 us | }
> 1) 0.054 us | _raw_spin_lock();
> 1) 6.707 us | }
> 1) 0.083 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
> 1) + 10.083 us | }
> 1) + 10.985 us | }
> 1) | irq_exit() {
> 1) | rcu_irq_exit() {
> 1) 0.087 us | rcu_enter_nohz();
> 1) 0.429 us | }
> 1) 0.049 us | idle_cpu();
> 1) 1.088 us | }
> 1) + 14.551 us | }
> 1) 0.191 us | } /* __inet_lookup_established */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xen_evtchn_do_upcall
2012-10-24 9:23 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
@ 2012-10-24 13:39 ` David Xu
2012-10-24 13:54 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Xu @ 2012-10-24 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell; +Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10762 bytes --]
Hi Lan,
Thanks for your reply. I did a experiment as follows,
I assigned 2 vCPU to a VM, one vCPU (vCPU0) was pinned to a physical CPU
shared with several other VMs and the other vCPU (vCPU1) was pinned to an
idle physical CPU occupied by this VM only. Then in Guest OS I run iperf
server to measure its TCP receiving throughput. In order to shrink the
receiving delay caused by vCPU scheduling, I pin the IRQ context of NIC to
vCPU1 and run iperf server on the vCPU0. This method works well for UDP,
but does not work for TCP. I track the involved function by ftrace and get
the following results which contains lots of xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine.
What's the meaning of this process (xen_evtchn_do_upcall
=> handle_irq_event => xennet_tx_buf_gc => gnttab_query_foreign_access)?
1) | tcp_v4_rcv() {
1) 0.087 us | __inet_lookup_established();
1) | sk_filter() {
1) | security_sock_rcv_skb() {
1) 0.049 us | cap_socket_sock_rcv_skb();
1) 0.374 us | }
1) 0.708 us | }
1) | _raw_spin_lock() {
1) | xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
1) 0.051 us | exit_idle();
1) | irq_enter() {
1) | rcu_irq_enter() {
1) 0.094 us | rcu_exit_nohz();
1) 0.432 us | }
1) 0.055 us | idle_cpu();
1) 1.166 us | }
1) | __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
1) 0.120 us | irq_to_desc();
1) | handle_edge_irq() {
1) 0.103 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) | ack_dynirq() {
1) | evtchn_from_irq() {
1) | info_for_irq() {
1) | irq_get_irq_data() {
1) 0.051 us | irq_to_desc();
1) 0.400 us | }
1) 0.746 us | }
1) 1.074 us | }
1) 0.050 us | irq_move_irq();
1) 1.767 us | }
1) | handle_irq_event() {
1) 0.164 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) | handle_irq_event_percpu() {
1) | xennet_interrupt() {
1) 0.125 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
1) | xennet_tx_buf_gc() {
1) 0.082 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
1) 0.050 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
1) 0.070 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
1) 0.061 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
1) 0.460 us | }
1) 0.058 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
1) 0.050 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
1) 0.050 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
1) 0.059 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
1) 0.440 us | }
1) 3.710 us | }
1) 0.092 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
1) 4.845 us | }
1) 0.075 us | note_interrupt();
1) 5.567 us | }
1) 0.055 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) 6.889 us | }
1) 0.080 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) + 10.081 us | }
1) + 10.965 us | }
1) | irq_exit() {
1) | rcu_irq_exit() {
1) 0.086 us | rcu_enter_nohz();
1) 0.424 us | }
1) 0.049 us | idle_cpu();
1) 1.094 us | }
1) + 14.555 us | }
1) 0.120 us | } /* _raw_spin_lock */
1) | __wake_up_sync_key() {
1) 0.099 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
1) | __wake_up_common() {
1) | autoremove_wake_function() {
1) | default_wake_function() {
1) | try_to_wake_up() {
1) 0.103 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
1) 0.078 us | task_waking_fair();
1) 0.102 us | select_task_rq_fair();
1) | xen_smp_send_reschedule() {
1) | xen_send_IPI_one() {
1) | notify_remote_via_irq() {
1) | evtchn_from_irq() {
1) | info_for_irq() {
1) | irq_get_irq_data() {
1) 0.067 us | irq_to_desc();
1) 0.396 us | }
1) 0.727 us | }
1) 1.055 us | }
1) 1.699 us | }
1) 2.048 us | }
1) 2.407 us | }
1) 0.066 us | ttwu_stat();
1) 0.114 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
1) 4.941 us | }
1) 5.294 us | }
1) 5.645 us | }
1) 6.023 us | }
1) 0.094 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
1) 7.156 us | }
1) 0.058 us | dst_metric();
1) | inet_csk_reset_xmit_timer.constprop.34() {
1) | sk_reset_timer() {
1) | mod_timer() {
1) | lock_timer_base.isra.30() {
1) 0.099 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
1) 0.436 us | }
1) 0.049 us | idle_cpu();
1) 0.116 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) 0.074 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) 0.072 us | internal_add_timer();
1) 0.103 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
1) 2.673 us | }
1) 3.039 us | }
1) 3.397 us | }
1) 0.082 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) 0.061 us | sock_put();
1) + 48.704 us | }
When I run both process context of application ( e.g. iperf server ) and
IRQ context on vCPU1 which is the ''fast" core, no any xen_evtchn_do_upcall
routine found.
1) | tcp_v4_rcv() {
1) 0.081 us | __inet_lookup_established();
1) | sk_filter() {
1) | security_sock_rcv_skb() {
1) 0.059 us | cap_socket_sock_rcv_skb();
1) 0.542 us | }
1) 0.875 us | }
1) 0.060 us | _raw_spin_lock();
1) 0.117 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
1) 0.053 us | sock_put();
1) 2.703 us | }
Do you think these xen_evtchn_do_upcall routines are due to the
synchronization between process context and softirq context? Thanks.
Regards,
Cong
2012/10/24 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
> On Mon, 2012-10-22 at 02:51 +0100, David Xu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > Is anybody know the purpose of this method (xen_evtchn_do_upcall)?
>
> It is the callback used to inject event channels events (i.e. IRQs) into
> the guest. You would expect to see it at the base of any stack trace
> taken from interrupt context.
>
> > When I run a user level application involved in TCP receiving and the
> > SoftIRQ for eth0 on the same CPU core, everything is OK. But if I run
> > them on 2 different cores, there will be xen_evtchn_do_upcall()
> > existing (maybe when the local_bh_disable() or local_bh_enable() is
> > called)
>
> it would not be unusual to get an interrupt immediately after
> re-enabling interrupts.
>
> > in __inet_lookup_established() routine which costs longer time than
> > the first scenario. Is it due to the synchronization issue between
> > process context and softirq context? Thanks for any reply.
> >
> >
> > 1) | __inet_lookup_established() {
> > 1) | xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
> > 1) 0.054 us | exit_idle();
> > 1) | irq_enter() {
> > 1) | rcu_irq_enter() {
> > 1) 0.102 us | rcu_exit_nohz();
> > 1) 0.431 us | }
> > 1) 0.064 us | idle_cpu();
> > 1) 1.152 us | }
> > 1) | __xen_evtchn_do_upcall() {
> > 1) 0.119 us | irq_to_desc();
> > 1) | handle_edge_irq() {
> > 1) 0.107 us | _raw_spin_lock();
> > 1) | ack_dynirq() {
> > 1) | evtchn_from_irq() {
> > 1) | info_for_irq() {
> > 1) | irq_get_irq_data() {
> > 1) 0.052 us | irq_to_desc();
> > 1) 0.418 us | }
> > 1) 0.782 us | }
> > 1) 1.135 us | }
> > 1) 0.049 us | irq_move_irq();
> > 1) 1.800 us | }
> > 1) | handle_irq_event() {
> > 1) 0.161 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
> > 1) | handle_irq_event_percpu() {
> > 1) | xennet_interrupt() {
> > 1) 0.125 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
> > 1) | xennet_tx_buf_gc() {
> > 1) 0.079 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
> > 1) 0.050 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
> > 1) 0.069 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
> > 1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
> > 1) 0.055 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
> > 1) 0.472 us | }
> > 1) 0.049 us | gnttab_query_foreign_access();
> > 1) 0.058 us | gnttab_end_foreign_access_ref();
> > 1) 0.058 us | gnttab_release_grant_reference();
> > 1) | dev_kfree_skb_irq() {
> > 1) 0.050 us | raise_softirq_irqoff();
> > 1) 0.456 us | }
> > 1) 3.714 us | }
> > 1) 0.102 us | _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
> > 1) 4.857 us | }
> > 1) 0.061 us | note_interrupt();
> > 1) 5.571 us | }
> > 1) 0.054 us | _raw_spin_lock();
> > 1) 6.707 us | }
> > 1) 0.083 us | _raw_spin_unlock();
> > 1) + 10.083 us | }
> > 1) + 10.985 us | }
> > 1) | irq_exit() {
> > 1) | rcu_irq_exit() {
> > 1) 0.087 us | rcu_enter_nohz();
> > 1) 0.429 us | }
> > 1) 0.049 us | idle_cpu();
> > 1) 1.088 us | }
> > 1) + 14.551 us | }
> > 1) 0.191 us | } /* __inet_lookup_established */
>
>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 13111 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xen_evtchn_do_upcall
2012-10-24 13:39 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
@ 2012-10-24 13:54 ` Ian Campbell
2012-10-24 14:23 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2012-10-24 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Xu; +Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 14:39 +0100, David Xu wrote:
> Hi Lan,
>
>
> Thanks for your reply. I did a experiment as follows,
> I assigned 2 vCPU to a VM, one vCPU (vCPU0) was pinned to a physical
> CPU shared with several other VMs and the other vCPU (vCPU1) was
> pinned to an idle physical CPU occupied by this VM only. Then in Guest
> OS I run iperf server to measure its TCP receiving throughput. In
> order to shrink the receiving delay caused by vCPU scheduling, I pin
> the IRQ context of NIC to vCPU1 and run iperf server on the vCPU0.
> This method works well for UDP, but does not work for TCP. I track the
> involved function by ftrace and get the following results which
> contains lots of xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine. What's the meaning of
> this process (xen_evtchn_do_upcall => handle_irq_event =>
> xennet_tx_buf_gc => gnttab_query_foreign_access)?
Have you looked at the code for any of those functions?
If you had done you'd find it is pretty obviously an interrupt being
delivered to the network device and the associated work to satisfy that
interrupt.
It doesn't seem that surprising that an iperf test should involve lots
of network interrupts.
It's not entirely clear to me what you are expecting to find and/or what
you are trying to prove.
> When I run both process context of application ( e.g. iperf server )
> and IRQ context on vCPU1 which is the ''fast" core, no
> any xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine found.
Perhaps on the fast core NAPI is able to kick in and therefore the NIC
becomes polled instead of interrupt driven?
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xen_evtchn_do_upcall
2012-10-24 13:54 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
@ 2012-10-24 14:23 ` David Xu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Xu @ 2012-10-24 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell; +Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3160 bytes --]
Hi Lan,
I am trying to improve the TCP/UDP performance in VM. Due the the vCPU
scheduling on a pCPU sharing platform, the TCP receiving delay will be
significant which hurt the TCP/UDP throughput. So I want to offload the
softIRQ context to another Idle pCPU which I call fast-tick CPU. The packet
receiving process is like this: IRQ routine can continue picking packet
from ring buffer and put it to TCP receive buffer ( receive_queue,
prequeue, backlog_queue ) in kernel no matter whether the user process on
another CPU shared with other VMs is running or not. Once the vCPU holding
the user process gets scheduled, user process will fetch all packets from
receive buffer in kernel, which can improve the throughput. This works well
for UDP unfortunately does not work for TCP currently.
I found those xen_evtchn_do_upcall routines existing when irq context try
to get the spinlock on the socket (Of course, they may happen in other
paths). If this spinlock is held by process context, irq context has to
spin on it and can not put any packet to receive buffer in time. So I doubt
these xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine are due to the synchronization between
process context and irq context. Since I run process context and irq
context on 2 different vCPU, when they try to get the spinlock on the same
socket there will be interrupts between 2 vCPU which are implemented by
event in Xen.
If there is any error in my description, please correct me. Thanks.
Regards,
Cong
2012/10/24 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
> On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 14:39 +0100, David Xu wrote:
> > Hi Lan,
> >
> >
> > Thanks for your reply. I did a experiment as follows,
> > I assigned 2 vCPU to a VM, one vCPU (vCPU0) was pinned to a physical
> > CPU shared with several other VMs and the other vCPU (vCPU1) was
> > pinned to an idle physical CPU occupied by this VM only. Then in Guest
> > OS I run iperf server to measure its TCP receiving throughput. In
> > order to shrink the receiving delay caused by vCPU scheduling, I pin
> > the IRQ context of NIC to vCPU1 and run iperf server on the vCPU0.
> > This method works well for UDP, but does not work for TCP. I track the
> > involved function by ftrace and get the following results which
> > contains lots of xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine. What's the meaning of
> > this process (xen_evtchn_do_upcall => handle_irq_event =>
> > xennet_tx_buf_gc => gnttab_query_foreign_access)?
>
> Have you looked at the code for any of those functions?
>
> If you had done you'd find it is pretty obviously an interrupt being
> delivered to the network device and the associated work to satisfy that
> interrupt.
>
> It doesn't seem that surprising that an iperf test should involve lots
> of network interrupts.
>
> It's not entirely clear to me what you are expecting to find and/or what
> you are trying to prove.
>
> > When I run both process context of application ( e.g. iperf server )
> > and IRQ context on vCPU1 which is the ''fast" core, no
> > any xen_evtchn_do_upcall routine found.
>
> Perhaps on the fast core NAPI is able to kick in and therefore the NIC
> becomes polled instead of interrupt driven?
>
> Ian.
>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3837 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-10-24 14:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-10-22 1:51 xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
2012-10-24 9:23 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
2012-10-24 13:39 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
2012-10-24 13:54 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall Ian Campbell
2012-10-24 14:23 ` xen_evtchn_do_upcall David Xu
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).