From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Waiman.Long@hp.com,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, davidlohr@hp.com,
hpa@zytor.com, aswin@hp.com, scott.norton@hp.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] mutex: When there is no owner, stop spinning after too many tries
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:00:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140114170056.7e93f279e11c751acb15ae67@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1389745990-7069-4-git-send-email-jason.low2@hp.com>
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:33:10 -0800 Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> wrote:
> When running workloads that have high contention in mutexes on an 8 socket
> machine, spinners would often spin for a long time with no lock owner.
>
> One of the potential reasons for this is because a thread can be preempted
> after clearing lock->owner but before releasing the lock, or preempted after
> acquiring the mutex but before setting lock->owner. In those cases, the
> spinner cannot check if owner is not on_cpu because lock->owner is NULL.
That sounds like a very small window. And your theory is that this
window is being hit sufficiently often to impact aggregate runtime
measurements, which sounds improbable to me?
> A solution that would address the preemption part of this problem would
> be to disable preemption between acquiring/releasing the mutex and
> setting/clearing the lock->owner. However, that will require adding overhead
> to the mutex fastpath.
preempt_disable() is cheap, and sometimes free.
Have you confirmed that the preempt_disable() approach actually fixes
the performance issues? If it does then this would confirm your
"potential reason" hypothesis. If it doesn't then we should be hunting
further for the explanation.
> The solution used in this patch is to limit the # of times thread can spin on
> lock->count when !owner.
>
> The threshold used in this patch for each spinner was 128, which appeared to
> be a generous value, but any suggestions on another method to determine
> the threshold are welcomed.
It's a bit hacky, isn't it? If your "owner got preempted in the
window" theory is correct then I guess this is reasonableish. But if
!owner is occurring for other reasons then perhaps there are better
solutions.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-15 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-15 0:33 [RFC 0/3] mutex: Reduce spinning contention when there is no lock owner Jason Low
2014-01-15 0:33 ` [RFC 1/3] mutex: In mutex_can_spin_on_owner(), return false if task need_resched() Jason Low
2014-01-15 7:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-15 7:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-15 20:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2014-01-15 0:33 ` [RFC 2/3] mutex: Modify the way optimistic spinners are queued Jason Low
2014-01-15 15:10 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-15 19:23 ` Jason Low
2014-01-15 0:33 ` [RFC 3/3] mutex: When there is no owner, stop spinning after too many tries Jason Low
2014-01-15 1:00 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2014-01-15 7:04 ` Jason Low
2014-01-15 1:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-01-15 7:34 ` Jason Low
2014-01-15 15:19 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-16 2:45 ` Jason Low
2014-01-16 3:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-01-16 6:46 ` Jason Low
2014-01-16 12:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-16 20:48 ` Jason Low
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=20140114170056.7e93f279e11c751acb15ae67@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®