mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/3]: perf: reduce data loss when profiling highly parallel CPU bound workloads
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 13:40:17 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c5d4b01-0eb8-f97e-6a70-44be7961d7f8@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180910091841.GA4664@gmail.com>

Hi Ingo,

On 10.09.2018 12:18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Currently in record mode the tool implements trace writing serially. 
>> The algorithm loops over mapped per-cpu data buffers and stores 
>> ready data chunks into a trace file using write() system call.
>>
>> At some circumstances the kernel may lack free space in a buffer 
>> because the other buffer's half is not yet written to disk due to 
>> some other buffer's data writing by the tool at the moment.
>>
>> Thus serial trace writing implementation may cause the kernel 
>> to loose profiling data and that is what observed when profiling 
>> highly parallel CPU bound workloads on machines with big number 
>> of cores.
> 
> Yay! I saw this frequently on a 120-CPU box (hw is broken now).
> 
>> Data loss metrics is the ratio lost_time/elapsed_time where 
>> lost_time is the sum of time intervals containing PERF_RECORD_LOST 
>> records and elapsed_time is the elapsed application run time 
>> under profiling.
>>
>> Applying asynchronous trace streaming thru Posix AIO API
>> (http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/aio.7.html) 
>> lowers data loss metrics value providing 2x improvement -
>> lowering 98% loss to almost 0%.
> 
> Hm, instead of AIO why don't we use explicit threads instead? I think Posix AIO will fall back 
> to threads anyway when there's no kernel AIO support (which there probably isn't for perf 
> events).

Explicit threading is surely an option but having more threads 
in the tool that stream performance data is a considerable 
design complication.

Luckily, glibc AIO implementation is already based on pthreads, 
but having a writing thread for every distinct fd only.

> 
> Per-CPU threading the record session would have so many other advantages as well (scalability, 
> etc.).> 
> Jiri did per-CPU recording patches a couple of months ago, not sure how usable they are at the 
> moment?

Tool threads may contend, and actually do, with application 
threads, under heavy load when all CPU cores are utilized,
and this may alter performance profile.

Thanks,
Alexey

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-09-10 10:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-07  7:07 Alexey Budankov
2018-09-07  7:11 ` [PATCH v8 1/3]: perf util: map data buffer for preserving collected data Alexey Budankov
2018-09-07  7:19 ` [PATCH v8 2/3]: perf record: enable asynchronous trace writing Alexey Budankov
2018-09-07  7:39 ` [PATCH v8 3/3]: perf record: extend trace writing to multi AIO Alexey Budankov
2018-09-07  9:34 ` [PATCH v8 0/3]: perf: reduce data loss when profiling highly parallel CPU bound workloads Alexey Budankov
2018-09-10  9:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-09-10  9:59   ` Jiri Olsa
2018-09-10 10:03     ` Ingo Molnar
2018-09-10 10:08       ` Jiri Olsa
2018-09-10 10:13         ` Ingo Molnar
2018-09-10 10:23           ` Jiri Olsa
2018-09-10 10:45             ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-10 10:40   ` Alexey Budankov [this message]
2018-09-10 12:06     ` Ingo Molnar
2018-09-10 13:58       ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2018-09-10 15:19         ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-10 14:48       ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-11  6:35         ` Ingo Molnar
2018-09-11  8:16           ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-11  8:34             ` Jiri Olsa
2018-09-11 13:42               ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-13  8:00                 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-09-11 14:19           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-12  8:27             ` Alexey Budankov

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=2c5d4b01-0eb8-f97e-6a70-44be7961d7f8@linux.intel.com \
    --to=alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --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

Powered by JetHome