From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Sebastian Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
"André Almeida" <andrealmeid@igalia.com>,
"Darren Hart" <dvhart@infradead.org>,
"Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Juri Lelli" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Valentin Schneider" <vschneid@redhat.com>,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] futex: Use RCU-based per-CPU reference counting
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 23:51:46 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ae8c6fd5-cc9c-44f3-a489-0346873f4be5@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250716142946.GD905792@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 7/16/25 19:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 10:34:24PM +0530, Shrikanth Hegde wrote:
>
>> I did try again by going to baseline, removed BROKEN and ran below. Which gives us immutable numbers.
>> ./perf bench futex hash -Ib512
>> Averaged 1536035 operations/sec (+- 0.11%), total secs = 10
>> Futex hashing: 512 hash buckets (immutable)
>>
>> So, with -b 512 option, it is around 8-10% less compared to immutable.
>
> Urgh, can you run perf on that and tell me if this is due to
> this_cpu_{inc,dec}() doing local_irq_disable() or the smp_load_acquire()
> doing LWSYNC ?
It seems like due to rcu and irq enable.
Both perf records are collected with -b512.
base_futex_immutable_b512 - perf record collected with baseline + remove BROKEN + ./perf bench futex hash -Ib512
per_cpu_futex_hash_b_512 - baseline + series + ./perf bench futex hash -b512
perf diff base_futex_immutable_b512 per_cpu_futex_hash_b_512
# Event 'cycles'
#
# Baseline Delta Abs Shared Object Symbol
# ........ ......... .......................... ....................................................
#
21.62% -2.26% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_get_value_locked
0.16% +2.01% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __rcu_read_unlock
1.35% +1.63% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] arch_local_irq_restore.part.0
+1.48% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_private_hash_put
+1.16% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_ref_get
10.41% -0.78% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call_vectored_common
1.24% +0.72% perf [.] workerfn
5.32% -0.66% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_q_lock
2.48% -0.43% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_wait
2.47% -0.40% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] _raw_spin_lock
2.98% -0.35% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_q_unlock
2.42% -0.34% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __futex_wait
5.47% -0.32% libc.so.6 [.] syscall
4.03% -0.32% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] memcpy_power7
0.16% +0.22% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] arch_local_irq_restore
5.93% -0.18% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] futex_hash
1.72% -0.17% [kernel.vmlinux] [k] sys_futex
>
> Anyway, I think we can improve both. Does the below help?
>
>
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/futex/core.c b/kernel/futex/core.c
> index d9bb5567af0c..8c41d050bd1f 100644
> --- a/kernel/futex/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex/core.c
> @@ -1680,10 +1680,10 @@ static bool futex_ref_get(struct futex_private_hash *fph)
> {
> struct mm_struct *mm = fph->mm;
>
> - guard(rcu)();
> + guard(preempt)();
>
> - if (smp_load_acquire(&fph->state) == FR_PERCPU) {
> - this_cpu_inc(*mm->futex_ref);
> + if (READ_ONCE(fph->state) == FR_PERCPU) {
> + __this_cpu_inc(*mm->futex_ref);
> return true;
> }
>
> @@ -1694,10 +1694,10 @@ static bool futex_ref_put(struct futex_private_hash *fph)
> {
> struct mm_struct *mm = fph->mm;
>
> - guard(rcu)();
> + guard(preempt)();
>
> - if (smp_load_acquire(&fph->state) == FR_PERCPU) {
> - this_cpu_dec(*mm->futex_ref);
> + if (READ_ONCE(fph->state) == FR_PERCPU) {
> + __this_cpu_dec(*mm->futex_ref);
> return false;
> }
>
Yes. It helps. It improves "-b 512" numbers by at-least 5%.
baseline + series:
Averaged 1412543 operations/sec (+- 0.14%), total secs = 10
Futex hashing: 512 hash buckets
baseline + series+ above_patch:
Averaged 1482733 operations/sec (+- 0.26%), total secs = 10 <<< 5% improvement
Futex hashing: 512 hash buckets
Now we are closer baseline/immutable by 4-5%.
baseline:
commit 8784fb5fa2e0042fe3b1632d4876e1037b695f56 (HEAD)
./perf bench futex hash
Averaged 1559643 operations/sec (+- 0.09%), total secs = 10
Futex hashing: global hash
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-16 18:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-10 11:00 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] selftests/futex: Adapt the private hash test to RCU related changes Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] futex: Use RCU-based per-CPU reference counting instead of rcuref_t Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-16 2:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-08-26 0:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-30 12:20 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] " André Draszik
2025-07-30 19:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-01 14:59 ` André Draszik
2025-08-02 13:22 ` [tip: locking/urgent] futex: Move futex cleanup to __mmdrop() tip-bot2 for Thomas Gleixner
2025-08-21 17:39 ` Breno Leitao
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] futex: Make futex_private_hash_get() static Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] futex: Remove support for IMMUTABLE Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] selftests/futex: " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-10 11:00 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] perf bench futex: " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-11 18:33 ` [tip: locking/futex] " tip-bot2 for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-15 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] futex: Use RCU-based per-CPU reference counting Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-15 16:31 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-07-15 17:04 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2025-07-16 14:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-07-16 18:21 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2025-11-06 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-06 11:09 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-11-06 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-06 20:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-06 11:40 ` [tip: locking/urgent] futex: Optimize per-cpu " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-06 15:26 ` Shrikanth Hegde
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=ae8c6fd5-cc9c-44f3-a489-0346873f4be5@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vschneid@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®