From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "struct perf_sample_data" alignment
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 09:36:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YEHtjioucovbxbRt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgQWHDUFjzmAazg8WN0BR7nOyHmduj-MV1GWWDUu+UKCQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 07:45:44PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That ____cacheline_aligned goes back many years, this is not new, it
> seems to come from back in 2014: commit 2565711fb7d7 ("perf: Improve
> the perf_sample_data struct layout").
long time ago...
> But it really seems entirely and utterly bogus. That cacheline
> alignment makes things *worse*, when the variables are on the local
> stack. The local stack is already going to be dirty and in the cache,
> and aligning those things isn't going to - and I quote from the code
> in that commend in that commit - "minimize the cachelines touched".
>
> Quite the reverse. It's just going to make the stack frame use *more*
> memory, and make any cacheline usage _worse_.
IIRC there is more history here, but I can't seem to find references
just now.
What I remember is that since perf_sample_data is fairly large,
unconditionally initializing the whole thing is *slow* (and
-fauto-var-init=zero will hurt here).
So at some point I removed that full initialization and made sure we
only unconditionally touched the first few variables, which gave a
measurable speedup.
Then things got messy again and the commit 2565711fb7d7 referenced above
was cleanup, to get back to that initial state.
Now, you're right that __cacheline_aligned on on-stack (and this is
indeed mostly on-stack) is fairly tedious (there were a few patches
recently to reduce the amount of on-stack instances).
I'll put it on the todo list, along with that hotplug stuff (which I
tried to fix but ended up with an even bigger mess). I suppose we can
try and not have the alignment for the on-stack instances while
preserving it for the few off-stack ones.
Also; we're running on the NMI stack, and that's not typically hot.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-05 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 3:45 Linus Torvalds
2021-03-05 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-03-05 14:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-03-05 15:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-03-06 13:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2021-03-08 10:01 ` David Laight
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=YEHtjioucovbxbRt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--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®