Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1175566

Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging normal ones

From "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging normal ones
Date 2015-07-01 23:50 +0200
Message-ID <pHy3g-2ew-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <pHr1L-6fJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pHsTV-7pb-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <pHtGi-7Wq-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <pHx7b-1sY-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pHxJW-23b-65@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 02:20:01PM -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 01:09:36PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 07:02:42PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > USB sure, but a backing dev is involved in nfs clients, loopback and all
> > > sorts of block/filesystem like setups.
> > > 
> > > unmount an NFS mount and voila expedited rcu, unmount a loopback, tada.
> > > 
> > > All you need is a regular server workload triggering any of that on a
> > > semi regular basis and even !rt people might start to notice something
> > > is up.
> > 
> > I don't believe that latency-sensitive systems are going to be messing
> > with remapping their storage at runtime, let alone on a regular basis.
> > If they are not latency sensitive, and assuming that the rate of
> > storage remapping is at all sane, I bet that they won't notice the
> > synchronize_rcu_expedited() overhead.  The overhead of the actual
> > remapping will very likely leave the synchronize_rcu_expedited() overhead
> > way down in the noise.
> > 
> > And if they are doing completely insane rates of storage remapping,
> > I suspect that the batching in the synchronize_rcu_expedited()
> > implementation will reduce the expedited-grace-period overhead still
> > further as a fraction of the total.
> 
> Consider the case of container-based systems, calling mount as part of
> container setup and umount as part of container teardown.
> 
> And those workloads are often sensitive to latency, not throughput.

So people are really seeing a synchronize_rcu_expedited() on each
container setup/teardown right now?  Or is this something that could
happen if they were mounting block devices rather than rebind mounts?

And when you say that these workloads are sensitive to latency, I am
guessing that you mean to the millisecond-level latencies seen from
synchronize_rcu() as opposed to the microsecond-level OS jitter from
synchronize_rcu_expedited().  Or are there really containers workloads
that care about the few microseconds of OS jitter that would be incurred
due to expedited grace periods?

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging  normal ones "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-06-30 23:50 +0200
  [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 5/5] rcu: Limit expedited helping to every 10 ms or every 4th GP "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-06-30 23:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 5/5] rcu: Limit expedited helping to  every 10 ms or every 4th GP Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> - 2015-07-01 00:00 +0200
  [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/5] rcu: Prepare for expedited GP driving normal GP "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-06-30 23:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods  encouraging normal ones josh@joshtriplett.org - 2015-07-01 00:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging  normal ones Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2015-07-01 02:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods  encouraging normal ones josh@joshtriplett.org - 2015-07-01 23:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods encouraging  normal ones "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-07-01 23:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods  encouraging normal ones Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 03:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods  encouraging normal ones josh@joshtriplett.org - 2015-07-02 03:40 +0200
        Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 0/5] Expedited grace periods  encouraging normal ones Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 04:10 +0200

csiph-web