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 15:57:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YEJG8v/sCxsG5Lsg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YEHtjioucovbxbRt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 09:36:30AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 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.
This seems to be it... (completely untested)
---
diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index 3f7f89ea5e51..918a296d2ca2 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -1032,7 +1032,9 @@ struct perf_sample_data {
u64 cgroup;
u64 data_page_size;
u64 code_page_size;
-} ____cacheline_aligned;
+};
+
+typedef struct perf_sample_data perf_sample_data_t ____cacheline_aligned;
/* default value for data source */
#define PERF_MEM_NA (PERF_MEM_S(OP, NA) |\
diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index b0c45d923f0f..f32c623abef6 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -923,7 +923,7 @@ __bpf_perf_event_output(struct pt_regs *regs, struct bpf_map *map,
* bpf_perf_event_output
*/
struct bpf_trace_sample_data {
- struct perf_sample_data sds[3];
+ perf_sample_data_t sds[3];
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct bpf_trace_sample_data, bpf_trace_sds);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-05 15:00 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
2021-03-05 14:57 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=YEJG8v/sCxsG5Lsg@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®