From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org>,
"Shai Fultheim (Shai@scalex86.org)" <shai@scalex86.org>,
pravin b shelar <pravin.shelar@calsoftinc.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes, SMP and NUMA improvements
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:10:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200703152010.35614.dada1@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200608090843.52893.dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Hi
I'm pleased to present these patches which improve linux futex performance and
scalability, on both UP, SMP and NUMA configs.
I had this idea last year but I was not understood, probably because I gave
not enough explanations. Sorry if this mail is really long...
Analysis of current linux futex code :
--------------------------------------
A central hash table futex_queues[] holds all contexts (futex_q) of waiting
threads.
Each futex_wait()/futex_wait() has to obtain a spinlock on a hash slot to
perform lookups or insert/deletion of a futex_q.
When a futex_wait() is done, thread has to :
1) - Obtain a read lock on mmap_sem to be able to validate the user pointer
(calling find_vma()). This validation tells us if the futex use
an inode based store (mapped file), or mm based store (anonymous mem)
2) - compute a hash key
3) - Atomic Increment of reference counter on an inode or a mm
4) - lock part of futex_queues[] hash table
5) - perform the test on value of futex.
(rollback is value != expected_value, returns EWOULDBLOCK)
(various loops if test triggers mm faults)
6) queue the context into hash table, release the lock got in 4)
7) - release the read_lock on mmap_sem
<block>
8) Eventually unqueue the context (but rarely, as this part
may be done by the futex_wake())
Futexes were designed to improve scalability but current implementation
has various problems :
- Central hashtable :
This means scalability problems if many processes/threads want to use
futexes at the same time.
This means NUMA unbalance because this hashtable is located on one node.
- Using mmap_sem on every futex() syscall :
Even if mmap_sem is a rw_semaphore, up_read()/down_read() are doing atomic
ops on mmap_sem, dirtying cache line :
- lot of cache line ping pongs on SMP configurations.
mmap_sem is also extensively used by mm code (page faults, mmap()/munmap())
Highly threaded processes might suffer from mmap_sem contention.
mmap_sem is also used by oprofile code. Enabling oprofile hurts threaded
programs because of contention on the mmap_sem cache line.
- Using an atomic_inc()/atomic_dec() on inode ref counter or mm ref counter:
It's also a cache line ping pong on SMP. It also increases mmap_sem hold time
because of cache misses.
Most of these scalability problems come from the fact that futexes are in
one global namespace. As we use a central hash table, we must make sure
they are all using the same reference (given by the mm subsystem).
We chose to force all futexes be 'shared'. This has a cost.
But fact is POSIX defined PRIVATE and SHARED, allowing clear separation, and
optimal performance if carefuly implemented. Time has come for linux to have
better threading performance.
PTHREAD_PROCESS_PRIVATE semantic allows implementation to use separate
repositories :
- One 'global' namespace for all PROCESS_SHARED futexes.
- One "per process private repository" for PROCESS_PRIVATE futexes.
This repository is NUMA aware, it is allocated the first time a process
issues a futex(XXXX_PRIVATE) call. If allocation is not possible because
of memory shortage, we just fallback using the central repository.
The goal is to permit new futex commands to avoid :
- Using the central hash table (still used by PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED futexes)
- Taking the mmap_sem semaphore, conflicting with other subsystems.
- Modifying a ref_count on mm or an inode, still conflicting with mm or fs.
This is possible because, for one process using PTHREAD_PROCESS_PRIVATE
futexes, we only need to distinguish futexes by their virtual address, no
matter the underlying mm storage is.
This is why this patches :
1) Define new futex subcommands (basically adding a _PRIVATE flag)
Avoids using mmap_sem, and ref counter on inode or mm.
2) Allows each process to have a private repository (a small hash table)
where its PROCESS_PRIVATE active futexes are stored, instead of
the global repository.
if CONFIG_BASE_SMALL, we still use the global repository
3) NUMA optimization : we allocate the global hash table with vmalloc()
If glibc wants to exploit this new infrastructure, it should use new
_PRIVATE futex subcommands for PTHREAD_PROCESS_PRIVATE futexes. And
be prepared to fallback on old subcommands for old kernels. Using one
global variable with the FUTEX_PRIVATE_FLAG or 0 value should be OK.
Only PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED futexes should use the old subcommands.
Compatibility with old applications is preserved, they still hit the
scalability problems, but new applications can fly :)
Note : the same SHARED futex (mapped on a file) can be used by old binaries
*and* new binaries, because both binaries will use the old subcommands.
Note : Vast majority of futexes should be using PROCESS_PRIVATE semantic,
as this is the default semantic. Almost all applications should benefit
of this changes (new kernel and updated libc)
Some bench results on a Pentium M 1.6 GHz (SMP kernel on a UP machine)
/* calling futex_wait(addr, value) with value != *addr */
450 cycles per futex(FUTEX_WAIT) call (mixing 2 futexes)
427 cycles per futex(FUTEX_WAIT) call (using one futex)
337 cycles per futex(FUTEX_WAIT_PRIVATE) call (mixing 2 futexes)
332 cycles per futex(FUTEX_WAIT_PRIVATE) call (using one futex)
For reference :
214 cycles per futex(1000) call (returns ENOSYS)
186 cycles per getppid() call
187 cycles per umask() call
182 cycles per ni_syscall() call
Thank you for reading this mail
[PATCH 1/3] FUTEX : introduce PROCESS_PRIVATE semantic
[PATCH 2/3] FUTEX : introduce private hashtables
[PATCH 3/3] FUTEX : NUMA friendly global hashtable
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-15 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-08 7:07 [RFC] NUMA futex hashing Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2006-08-08 9:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 20:31 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2006-08-08 9:37 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-08-08 9:58 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-08 10:07 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-08-08 9:57 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-08 10:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 10:36 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-08 12:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 12:47 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-08 12:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 14:39 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-08-08 15:11 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-08 15:36 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-08-08 16:22 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-08 16:26 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-08 16:49 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-08-08 16:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 16:34 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-08 16:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-08 16:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-09 1:56 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-08 16:58 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-08-08 17:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-09 1:58 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-09 6:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-08-09 6:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-03-15 19:10 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2007-03-15 20:15 ` [PATCH 0/3] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes, SMP and NUMA improvements Nick Piggin
2007-03-16 8:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-16 9:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-03-16 10:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-16 10:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-03-16 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-04 7:16 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-05 17:49 ` [PATCH] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes Eric Dumazet
2007-04-05 20:43 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-06 1:19 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-06 5:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-06 11:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-06 6:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-06 17:41 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-04-06 12:26 ` Shared futexes (was [PATCH] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes) Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-06 13:02 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-06 13:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-06 13:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-06 13:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-06 13:40 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-06 12:31 ` [PATCH] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes Peter Zijlstra
2007-04-07 8:43 ` [PATCH, take4] " Eric Dumazet
2007-04-07 9:30 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-07 10:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-11 7:22 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-11 8:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-11 9:23 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-11 9:30 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-04-11 9:39 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-11 9:40 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-11 9:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-12 1:57 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-07 11:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-04-07 11:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-07 16:40 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-07 22:15 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-10 9:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-11 9:19 ` [PATCH, take5] " Eric Dumazet
2007-04-11 12:23 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-26 12:55 ` [PATCH, take6] " Eric Dumazet
2007-04-26 13:35 ` Pierre Peiffer
2007-03-15 19:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] FUTEX : introduce PROCESS_PRIVATE semantic Eric Dumazet
2007-03-15 19:16 ` [PATCH 2/3] FUTEX : introduce private hashtables Eric Dumazet
2007-03-15 20:25 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-15 21:09 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-03-15 21:29 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-15 22:59 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-15 19:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] FUTEX : NUMA friendly global hashtable Eric Dumazet
2006-08-09 0:13 ` [RFC] NUMA futex hashing Ravikiran G Thirumalai
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=200703152010.35614.dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=drepper@gmail.com \
--cc=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=pravin.shelar@calsoftinc.com \
--cc=shai@scalex86.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
Powered by JetHome