Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1505121
| From | Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [PATCH v5 2/9] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq_lock() |
| Date | 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <suptT-2bV-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <suptT-2bV-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
An over-committed guest with more vCPUs than pCPUs has a heavy overload in
osq_lock().
This is because vCPU A hold the osq lock and yield out, vCPU B wait per_cpu
node->locked to be set. IOW, vCPU B wait vCPU A to run and unlock the osq
lock.
Kernel has an interface bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu) to see if a vCPU is
currently running or not. So break the spin loops on true condition.
test case:
perf record -a perf bench sched messaging -g 400 -p && perf report
before patch:
18.09% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] osq_lock
12.28% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
5.27% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_unlock
3.89% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] wait_consider_task
3.64% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] _raw_write_lock_irq
3.41% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner.is
2.49% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call
after patch:
20.68% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
8.45% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] mutex_unlock
4.12% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call
3.01% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] system_call_common
2.83% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] copypage_power7
2.64% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
2.00% sched-messaging [kernel.vmlinux] [k] osq_lock
Suggested-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
---
kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
index 05a3785..39d1385 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/osq_lock.c
@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ static inline int encode_cpu(int cpu_nr)
return cpu_nr + 1;
}
+static inline int node_cpu(struct optimistic_spin_node *node)
+{
+ return node->cpu - 1;
+}
+
static inline struct optimistic_spin_node *decode_cpu(int encoded_cpu_val)
{
int cpu_nr = encoded_cpu_val - 1;
@@ -118,8 +123,11 @@ bool osq_lock(struct optimistic_spin_queue *lock)
while (!READ_ONCE(node->locked)) {
/*
* If we need to reschedule bail... so we can block.
+ * Use vcpu_is_preempted to detech lock holder preemption issue
+ * and break. vcpu_is_preempted is a macro defined by false if
+ * arch does not support vcpu preempted check,
*/
- if (need_resched())
+ if (need_resched() || vcpu_is_preempted(node_cpu(node->prev)))
goto unqueue;
cpu_relax_lowlatency();
--
2.4.11
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v5 0/9] implement vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 2/9] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq_lock() Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 8/9] s390/spinlock: Provide vcpu_is_preempted Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 3/9] kernel/locking: Drop the overload of {mutex,rwsem}_spin_on_owner Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 1/9] kernel/sched: introduce vcpu preempted check interface Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 7/9] x86, xen: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 7/9] x86, xen: support vcpu preempted check Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-10-21 07:10 +0200
[PATCH v5 5/9] x86, paravirt: Add interface to support kvm/xen vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 03:30 +0200
RE: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> - 2016-10-21 13:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check "rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2016-10-21 20:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-24 04:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> - 2016-10-24 16:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check "rkrcmar@redhat.com" <rkrcmar@redhat.com> - 2016-10-24 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-24 04:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support vcpu preempted check xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-24 10:20 +0200
[PATCH v5 4/9] powerpc/spinlock: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
[PATCH v5 6/9] x86, kvm: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-20 19:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 6/9] x86, kvm: support vcpu preempted check xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-10-24 10:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] implement vcpu preempted check Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-10-21 07:50 +0200
csiph-web