From: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@fb.com>,
<calvinowens@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ksoftirqd: Enable IRQs and call cond_resched() before poking RCU
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:33:29 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150108043329.GB27996@mail.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150107165223.GA21555@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wednesday 01/07 at 08:52 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 06:19:26PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 05:49:06PM -0800, Calvin Owens wrote:
> > > While debugging an issue with excessive softirq usage, I encountered the
> > > following note in commit 3e339b5dae24a706 ("softirq: Use hotplug thread
> > > infrastructure"):
> > >
> > > [ paulmck: Call rcu_note_context_switch() with interrupts enabled. ]
> > >
> > > ...but despite this note, the patch still calls RCU with IRQs disabled.
> > >
> > > This seemingly innocuous change caused a significant regression in softirq
> > > CPU usage on the sending side of a large TCP transfer (~1 GB/s): when
> > > introducing 0.01% packet loss, the softirq usage would jump to around 25%,
> > > spiking as high as 50%. Before the change, the usage would never exceed 5%.
> > >
> > > Moving the call to rcu_note_context_switch() after the cond_sched() call,
> > > as it was originally before the hotplug patch, completely eliminated this
> > > problem.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes since v1:
> > > I mixed up the kernel versions I was patching against, sorry!
> > >
> > > kernel/softirq.c | 6 +++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
> > > index 501baa9..9e787d8 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/softirq.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/softirq.c
> > > @@ -656,9 +656,13 @@ static void run_ksoftirqd(unsigned int cpu)
> > > * in the task stack here.
> > > */
> > > __do_softirq();
> > > - rcu_note_context_switch();
> > > local_irq_enable();
> > > cond_resched();
> >
> > If this is for 3.20, we can just replace cond_resched() with
> > cond_resched_rcu_qs(), and get rid of the direct call to
> > rcu_note_context_switch(). This has the benefit of avoiding
> > needless rcu_note_context_switch() overhead if cond_resched()
> > actually did a reschedule.
> >
> > But don't try it in 3.19 or earlier. ;-)
>
> As in the following for 3.20. Does this version work for you?
That's great, thanks :)
Should this go to stable as well? It is technically a regression, albeit
a rather long-standing one.
My original scenario was a bit contrived, but I tested this on some real
loads and it makes a difference: on a heavily loaded Proxygen server,
the aggregate softirq CPU usage decreases by roughly 10% (relative)
given the same amount of traffic with the patch. It also produces
statistically significant performance wins at higher loads on
webservers: about a 1% reduction in overall CPU utilization and improved
latency metrics.
Thanks,
Calvin
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ksoftirqd: Enable IRQs and call cond_resched() before poking RCU
>
> While debugging an issue with excessive softirq usage, I encountered the
> following note in commit 3e339b5dae24a706 ("softirq: Use hotplug thread
> infrastructure"):
>
> [ paulmck: Call rcu_note_context_switch() with interrupts enabled. ]
>
> ...but despite this note, the patch still calls RCU with IRQs disabled.
>
> This seemingly innocuous change caused a significant regression in softirq
> CPU usage on the sending side of a large TCP transfer (~1 GB/s): when
> introducing 0.01% packet loss, the softirq usage would jump to around 25%,
> spiking as high as 50%. Before the change, the usage would never exceed 5%.
>
> Moving the call to rcu_note_context_switch() after the cond_sched() call,
> as it was originally before the hotplug patch, completely eliminated this
> problem, but the new cond_resched_rcu_qs() provides shorter code and
> avoids double RCU notification in the case where cond_resched() really
> did a context switch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>
> [ paulmck: Substituted shiny new cond_resched_rcu_qs() primitive. ]
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
> index 501baa9ac1be..8cdb98847c7b 100644
> --- a/kernel/softirq.c
> +++ b/kernel/softirq.c
> @@ -656,9 +656,8 @@ static void run_ksoftirqd(unsigned int cpu)
> * in the task stack here.
> */
> __do_softirq();
> - rcu_note_context_switch();
> local_irq_enable();
> - cond_resched();
> + cond_resched_rcu_qs();
> return;
> }
> local_irq_enable();
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-08 4:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-07 1:37 [PATCH] " Calvin Owens
2015-01-07 1:49 ` [PATCH v2] " Calvin Owens
2015-01-07 2:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-07 16:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-08 4:33 ` Calvin Owens [this message]
2015-01-08 4:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-08 21:46 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-13 11:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-01-13 18:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-13 21:16 ` [PATCH] " Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 22:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-20 13:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-01-20 20:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-21 3:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-01-21 5:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-21 6:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-01-21 9:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-01-21 10:27 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-01-22 10:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20150108043329.GB27996@mail.thefacebook.com \
--to=calvinowens@fb.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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