From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zilstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
byungchul.park@lge.com, kernel-team@android.com,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] rcu: Speed up calling of RCU tasks callbacks
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 19:22:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180524192247.759f7572@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180524231918.GA98334@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Thu, 24 May 2018 16:19:18 -0700
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 06:49:46PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > From: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> >
> > Joel Fernandes found that the synchronize_rcu_tasks() was taking a
> > significant amount of time. He demonstrated it with the following test:
> >
> > # cd /sys/kernel/tracing
> > # while [ 1 ]; do x=1; done &
> > # echo '__schedule_bug:traceon' > set_ftrace_filter
> > # time echo '!__schedule_bug:traceon' > set_ftrace_filter;
> >
> > real 0m1.064s
> > user 0m0.000s
> > sys 0m0.004s
> >
> > Where it takes a little over a second to perform the synchronize,
> > because there's a loop that waits 1 second at a time for tasks to get
> > through their quiescent points when there's a task that must be waited
> > for.
> >
> > After discussion we came up with a simple way to wait for holdouts but
> > increase the time for each iteration of the loop but no more than a
> > full second.
> >
> > With the new patch we have:
> >
> > # time echo '!__schedule_bug:traceon' > set_ftrace_filter;
> >
> > real 0m0.131s
> > user 0m0.000s
> > sys 0m0.004s
> >
> > Which drops it down to 13% of what the original wait time was.
>
> Should be 90% of original?
That would be if I said "drops it down X" but I said "drops it down to
X of what the original wait time was". And 0.131 is 13% of 1.064. :-)
> Other than minor change log change, looks good to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Awesome, thanks!
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-24 23:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-24 22:49 Steven Rostedt
2018-05-24 23:19 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-24 23:22 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2018-05-24 23:26 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-05-25 0:14 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-05-25 20:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20180524192247.759f7572@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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®