1. 14 8月, 2011 2 次提交
    • Y
      sched/cpupri: Remove cpupri->pri_active · 5710f15b
      Yong Zhang 提交于
      Since [sched/cpupri: Remove the vec->lock], member pri_active
      of struct cpupri is not needed any more, just remove it. Also
      clean stuff related to it.
      Signed-off-by: NYong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20110806001004.GA2207@zhySigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      5710f15b
    • S
      sched/cpupri: Remove the vec->lock · c92211d9
      Steven Rostedt 提交于
      sched/cpupri: Remove the vec->lock
      
      The cpupri vec->lock has been showing up as a top contention
      lately. This is because of the RT push/pull logic takes an
      agressive approach for migrating RT tasks. The cpupri logic is
      in place to improve the performance of the push/pull when dealing
      with large number CPU machines.
      
      The problem though is a vec->lock is required, where a vec is a
      global per RT priority structure. That is, if there are lots of
      RT tasks at the same priority, every time they are added or removed
      from the RT queue, this global vec->lock is taken. Now that more
      kernel threads are becoming RT (RCU boost and threaded interrupts)
      this is becoming much more of an issue.
      
      There are two variables that are being synced by the vec->lock.
      The cpupri bitmask, and the vec->counter. The cpupri bitmask
      is one bit per priority. If a RT priority vec has a process queued,
      then the vec->count is > 0 and the cpupri bitmask is set for that
      RT priority.
      
      If the cpupri bitmask gets out of sync with the vec->counter, we could
      end up pushing a low proirity RT task to a high priority queue.
      That RT task that could have run immediately could be queued on a
      run queue with a higher priority task indefinitely.
      
      The solution is not to use the cpupri bitmask and just look at the
      vec->count directly when doing a pull. The cpupri bitmask is just
      a fast way to scan the RT priorities when a pull is made. Instead
      of using the bitmask, and just examine all RT priorities, and
      look at the vec->counts, we could eliminate the vec->lock. The
      scan of RT tasks is to find a run queue that we can push an RT task
      to, and we do not push to a high priority queue, thus the scan only
      needs to go from 1 to RT task->prio, and not all 100 RT priorities.
      
      The push algorithm, which does the scan of RT priorities (and
      scan of the bitmask) only happens when we have an overloaded RT run
      queue (more than one RT task queued). The grabbing of the vec->lock
      happens every time any RT task is queued or dequeued on the run
      queue for that priority. The slowing down of the scan by not using
      a bitmask is negligible by the speed up of removing the vec->lock
      contention, and replacing it with an atomic counter and memory barrier.
      
      To prove this, I wrote a patch that times both the loop and the code
      that grabs the vec->locks. I passed the patches to various people
      (and companies) to test and show the results. I let everyone choose
      their own load to test, giving different loads on the system,
      for various different setups.
      
      Here's some of the results: (snipping to a few CPUs to not make
      this change log huge, but the results were consistent across
      the entire system).
      
      System 1 (24 CPUs)
      
      Before patch:
      CPU:    Name    Count   Max     Min     Average Total
      ----    ----    -----   ---     ---     ------- -----
      [...]
      cpu 20: loop    3057    1.766   0.061   0.642   1963.170
              vec     6782949 90.469  0.089   0.414   2811760.503
      cpu 21: loop    2617    1.723   0.062   0.641   1679.074
              vec     6782810 90.499  0.089   0.291   1978499.900
      cpu 22: loop    2212    1.863   0.063   0.699   1547.160
              vec     6767244 85.685  0.089   0.435   2949676.898
      cpu 23: loop    2320    2.013   0.062   0.594   1380.265
              vec     6781694 87.923  0.088   0.431   2928538.224
      
      After patch:
      cpu 20: loop    2078    1.579   0.061   0.533   1108.006
              vec     6164555 5.704   0.060   0.143   885185.809
      cpu 21: loop    2268    1.712   0.065   0.575   1305.248
              vec     6153376 5.558   0.060   0.187   1154960.469
      cpu 22: loop    1542    1.639   0.095   0.533   823.249
              vec     6156510 5.720   0.060   0.190   1172727.232
      cpu 23: loop    1650    1.733   0.068   0.545   900.781
              vec     6170784 5.533   0.060   0.167   1034287.953
      
      All times are in microseconds. The 'loop' is the amount of time spent
      doing the loop across the priorities (before patch uses bitmask).
      the 'vec' is the amount of time in the code that requires grabbing
      the vec->lock. The second patch just does not have the vec lock, but
      encompasses the same code.
      
      Amazingly the loop code even went down on average. The vec code went
      from .5 down to .18, that's more than half the time spent!
      
      Note, more than one test was run, but they all had the same results.
      
      System 2 (64 CPUs)
      
      Before patch:
      CPU:    Name    Count   Max     Min     Average Total
      ----    ----    -----   ---     ---     ------- -----
      cpu 60: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     5410840 277.954 0.084   0.782   4232895.727
      cpu 61: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     4915648 188.399 0.084   0.570   2803220.301
      cpu 62: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     5356076 276.417 0.085   0.786   4214544.548
      cpu 63: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     4891837 170.531 0.085   0.799   3910948.833
      
      After patch:
      cpu 60: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     5365118 5.080   0.021   0.063   340490.267
      cpu 61: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     4898590 1.757   0.019   0.071   347903.615
      cpu 62: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     5737130 3.067   0.021   0.119   687108.734
      cpu 63: loop    0       0       0       0       0
              vec     4903228 1.822   0.021   0.071   348506.477
      
      The test run during the measurement did not have any (very few,
      from other CPUs) RT tasks pushing. But this shows that it helped
      out tremendously with the contention, as the contention happens
      because the vec->lock is taken only on queuing at an RT priority,
      and different CPUs that queue tasks at the same priority will
      have contention.
      
      I tested on my own 4 CPU machine with the following results:
      
      Before patch:
      CPU:    Name    Count   Max     Min     Average Total
      ----    ----    -----   ---     ---     ------- -----
      cpu 0:  loop    2377    1.489   0.158   0.588   1398.395
              vec     4484    770.146 2.301   4.396   19711.755
      cpu 1:  loop    2169    1.962   0.160   0.576   1250.110
              vec     4425    152.769 2.297   4.030   17834.228
      cpu 2:  loop    2324    1.749   0.155   0.559   1299.799
              vec     4368    779.632 2.325   4.665   20379.268
      cpu 3:  loop    2325    1.629   0.157   0.561   1306.113
              vec     4650    408.782 2.394   4.348   20222.577
      
      After patch:
      CPU:    Name    Count   Max     Min     Average Total
      ----    ----    -----   ---     ---     ------- -----
      cpu 0:  loop    2121    1.616   0.113   0.636   1349.189
              vec     4303    1.151   0.225   0.421   1811.966
      cpu 1:  loop    2130    1.638   0.178   0.644   1372.927
              vec     4627    1.379   0.235   0.428   1983.648
      cpu 2:  loop    2056    1.464   0.165   0.637   1310.141
              vec     4471    1.311   0.217   0.433   1937.927
      cpu 3:  loop    2154    1.481   0.162   0.601   1295.083
              vec     4236    1.253   0.230   0.425   1803.008
      
      This was running my migrate.c code that can be found at:
      http://lwn.net/Articles/425763/
      
      The migrate code does stress the RT tasks a bit. This shows that
      the loop did increase a little after the patch, but not by much.
      The vec code dropped dramatically. From 4.3us down to .42us.
      That's a 10x improvement!
      Tested-by: NMike Galbraith <mgalbraith@suse.de>
      Tested-by: NLuis Claudio R. Gonçalves <lgoncalv@redhat.com>
      Tested-by: Matthew Hank Sabins<msabins@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NSteven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
      Reviewed-by: NGregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@gmail.com>
      Acked-by: NHillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
      Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1312317372.18583.101.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      c92211d9
  2. 17 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  3. 15 12月, 2009 1 次提交
  4. 30 3月, 2009 1 次提交
  5. 25 11月, 2008 1 次提交
  6. 06 6月, 2008 3 次提交