From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>,
William Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Chris Hyser <chris.hyser@oracle.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
Xiaofeng Cao <caoxiaofeng@yulong.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Barret Rhoden <brho@google.com>
Subject: [GIT PULL] prlimit and set/getpriority tasklist_lock optimizations
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 15:14:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ee2sfmtk.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220106172041.522167-1-brho@google.com> (Barret Rhoden's message of "Thu, 6 Jan 2022 12:20:38 -0500")
Linus,
Please pull the prlimit-tasklist_lock-for-v5.18 tag from the git tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiederm/user-namespace.git prlimit-tasklist_lock-for-v5.18
HEAD: 18c91bb2d87268d23868bf13508f5bc9cf04e89a prlimit: do not grab the tasklist_lock
From: Barret Rhoden <brho@google.com>
The tasklist_lock popped up as a scalability bottleneck on some testing
workloads. The readlocks in do_prlimit and set/getpriority are not
necessary in all cases.
Based on a cycles profile, it looked like ~87% of the time was spent in
the kernel, ~42% of which was just trying to get *some* spinlock
(queued_spin_lock_slowpath, not necessarily the tasklist_lock).
The big offenders (with rough percentages in cycles of the overall trace):
- do_wait 11%
- setpriority 8% (this patchset)
- kill 8%
- do_exit 5%
- clone 3%
- prlimit64 2% (this patchset)
- getrlimit 1% (this patchset)
I can't easily test this patchset on the original workload for various
reasons. Instead, I used the microbenchmark below to at least verify
there was some improvement. This patchset had a 28% speedup (12% from
baseline to set/getprio, then another 14% for prlimit).
One interesting thing is that my libc's getrlimit() was calling
prlimit64, so hoisting the read_lock(tasklist_lock) into sys_prlimit64
had no effect - it essentially optimized the older syscalls only. I
didn't do that in this patchset, but figured I'd mention it since it was
an option from the previous patch's discussion.
v3: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220106172041.522167-1-brho@google.com
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220105212828.197013-1-brho@google.com/
- update_rlimit_cpu on the group_leader instead of for_each_thread.
- update_rlimit_cpu still returns 0 or -ESRCH, even though we don't care
about the error here. it felt safer that way in case someone uses
that function again.
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211213220401.1039578-1-brho@google.com/
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
pid_t child;
struct rlimit rlim[1];
fork(); fork(); fork(); fork(); fork(); fork();
for (int i = 0; i < 5000; i++) {
child = fork();
if (child < 0)
exit(1);
if (child > 0) {
usleep(1000);
kill(child, SIGTERM);
waitpid(child, NULL, 0);
} else {
for (;;) {
setpriority(PRIO_PROCESS, 0,
getpriority(PRIO_PROCESS, 0));
getrlimit(RLIMIT_CPU, rlim);
}
}
}
return 0;
}
Barret Rhoden (3):
setpriority: only grab the tasklist_lock for PRIO_PGRP
prlimit: make do_prlimit() static
prlimit: do not grab the tasklist_lock
include/linux/posix-timers.h | 2 +-
include/linux/resource.h | 2 -
kernel/sys.c | 127 +++++++++++++++++----------------
kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c | 12 +++-
4 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
I have dropped the first change in this series as an almost identical
change was merged as commit 7f8ca0edfe07 ("kernel/sys.c: only take
tasklist_lock for get/setpriority(PRIO_PGRP)"). -- EWB
Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-23 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-06 17:20 [PATCH v3 0/3] " Barret Rhoden
2022-01-06 17:20 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] setpriority: only grab the tasklist_lock for PRIO_PGRP Barret Rhoden
2022-01-06 17:20 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] prlimit: make do_prlimit() static Barret Rhoden
2022-01-06 17:20 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] prlimit: do not grab the tasklist_lock Barret Rhoden
2022-03-23 20:14 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2022-03-24 19:44 ` [GIT PULL] prlimit and set/getpriority tasklist_lock optimizations pr-tracker-bot
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=87ee2sfmtk.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brho@google.com \
--cc=caoxiaofeng@yulong.com \
--cc=chris.hyser@oracle.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=legion@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=wcohen@redhat.com \
/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