mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Pascal CHAPPERON <pascal.chapperon@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: RCU related performance regression in 3.3
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 07:39:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120405143918.GE27672@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1838583439.163624.1333635333132.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m19>

On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 04:15:33PM +0200, Pascal CHAPPERON wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I didn't notice any significant slowdown while the system is up and running. A full kernel compilation (make -j 16) takes 14mn with both 3.2.10 and 3.3.0.

OK, so the natural approach is to disable CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ at
boot time.  Unfortunately, you appear to need it to remain disabled
through at least filesystem mounting, which if I understand correctly
happens long after system_state gets set to SYSTEM_RUNNING.

If RCU has some way to find out when init is complete, I can easily
make it so that CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ optimizes for speed during boot
and energy efficiency during runtime.

One thing I could easily do would be to provide a sysfs parameter or
some such that allows the boot process to enable energy-efficiency
mode at runtime.  I would much prefer to make this automatic, though.

Other thoughts?

							Thanx, Paul

> Pascal
> 
> 
> > Message du 05/04/12 16:01
> > De : "Paul E. McKenney" 
> > A : "Josh Boyer" 
> > Copie à : linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fedoraproject.org, pascal.chapperon@wanadoo.fr
> > Objet : Re: RCU related performance regression in 3.3
> > 
> > On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 08:37:59AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:36:33PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 11:27:27AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > > > Hi Paul,
> > > > > 
> > > > > We've had a few reports of some boot slowdowns with the 3.3 rebase we
> > > > > did in Fedora 16. One of our users volunteered to bisect a vanilla
> > > > > kernel and wound up at "rcu: Permit dyntick-idle with callbacks pending
> > > > > (commit 7cb924990)". You can find more details in the bug [1], but it's
> > > > > been reported on both physical hardware and in virtual machines.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Have you seen anything like this in your testing? Given the user used a
> > > > > vanilla 3.3 kernel, I'm wondering if there is a targetted fix that might
> > > > > be backported. If so, it would be good to get that headed to the 3.3.y
> > > > > stable tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > josh
> > > > > 
> > > > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806548
> > > > 
> > > > I will look into this. In the meantime, does setting
> > > > CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ=n get rid of the slowdowns?
> > > 
> > > Seems so. Pascal tried 3.4-rc1 with and without that set and found that
> > > disabling it lead to consistent timings. He put his findings in the
> > > bug, and I've also now CC'd him.
> > 
> > Thank you for the info! Is the performance problem limited to boot time,
> > or are there performance problems when the system is up and running?
> > 
> > Thanx, Paul
> > 
> >
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-05 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-04 15:27 Josh Boyer
2012-04-04 21:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-05 12:37   ` Josh Boyer
2012-04-05 14:00     ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-05 14:15       ` Pascal CHAPPERON
2012-04-05 14:39         ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-04-06  9:18           ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-04-10 16:07             ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-11 15:06               ` Pascal
2012-04-12 18:04                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-16 21:02                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-18  9:37                     ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-04-18 14:01                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-18 15:00                         ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-04-18 15:23                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-20 14:45                             ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-04-27 12:15 Pascal Chapperon
2012-04-28  3:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-01  0:02   ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-01  8:55     ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-05-01 15:45       ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-04 14:42         ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-05-04 15:04           ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-04 21:41             ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-05-04 23:14               ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-10  8:40                 ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-05-14 22:32                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-18 11:01                   ` Pascal Chapperon
2012-05-18 12:14                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-05-18 14:48                       ` Pascal Chapperon

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=20120405143918.GE27672@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=jwboyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pascal.chapperon@wanadoo.fr \
    /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