Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1184299
| From | Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Opportunistically defer kicking to unlock time |
| Date | 2015-07-15 08:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pMocW-7vv-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <pMksF-29i-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <pMksF-29i-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | IBM |
On 07/15/2015 07:43 AM, Waiman Long wrote: > Performing CPU kicking at lock time can be a bit faster if there > is no kick-ahead. On the other hand, deferring it to unlock time is > preferrable when kick-ahead can be performed or when the VM guest is > having too few vCPUs that a vCPU may be kicked twice before getting > the lock. This patch implements the deferring kicking when either > one of the above 2 conditions is true. > > Linux kernel builds were run in KVM guest on an 8-socket, 4 > cores/socket Westmere-EX system and a 4-socket, 8 cores/socket > Haswell-EX system. Both systems are configured to have 32 physical > CPUs. The kernel build times before and after the patch were: > > Westmere Haswell > Patch 32 vCPUs 48 vCPUs 32 vCPUs 48 vCPUs > ----- -------- -------- -------- -------- > Before patch 3m27.4s 10m32.0s 2m00.8s 14m52.5s > After patch 3m01.3s 9m50.9s 2m00.5s 13m28.1s > > On Westmere, both 32/48 vCPUs case showed some sizeable increase > in performance. For Haswell, there was some improvement in the > overcommitted (48 vCPUs) case. > > Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com> > --- Hi Waiman, For virtual guests, from my experiments, lock waiter preemption was the main concern especially with fair locks. I find that these set of patches are in right direction to address them. Thanks for the patches. -- 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 | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v2 5/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Opportunistically defer kicking to unlock time Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com> - 2015-07-15 04:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Opportunistically defer kicking to unlock time Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-07-15 08:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Opportunistically defer kicking to unlock time Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-07-15 12:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Opportunistically defer kicking to unlock time Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com> - 2015-07-16 04:20 +0200
csiph-web