From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>, <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <hare@suse.com>, <hch@lst.de>,
<axboe@kernel.dk>, <bvanassche@acm.org>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
<mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] genirq: Make threaded handler use irq affinity for managed interrupt
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:28:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <048746c22898849d28985c0f65cf2c2a@www.loen.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28424a58-1159-c3f9-1efb-f1366993afcf@huawei.com>
On 2019-12-10 09:45, John Garry wrote:
> On 10/12/2019 01:43, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 02:30:59PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>>> On 07/12/2019 08:03, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 10:35:04PM +0800, John Garry wrote:
>>>>> Currently the cpu allowed mask for the threaded part of a
>>>>> threaded irq
>>>>> handler will be set to the effective affinity of the hard irq.
>>>>>
>>>>> Typically the effective affinity of the hard irq will be for a
>>>>> single cpu. As such,
>>>>> the threaded handler would always run on the same cpu as the hard
>>>>> irq.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have seen scenarios in high data-rate throughput testing that
>>>>> the cpu
>>>>> handling the interrupt can be totally saturated handling both the
>>>>> hard
>>>>> interrupt and threaded handler parts, limiting throughput.
>>>>
>
> Hi Ming,
>
>>>> Frankly speaking, I never observed that single CPU is saturated by
>>>> one storage
>>>> completion queue's interrupt load. Because CPU is still much
>>>> quicker than
>>>> current storage device.
>>>>
>>>> If there are more drives, one CPU won't handle more than one
>>>> queue(drive)'s
>>>> interrupt if (nr_drive * nr_hw_queues) < nr_cpu_cores.
>>>
>>> Are things this simple? I mean, can you guarantee that fio
>>> processes are
>>> evenly distributed as such?
>> That is why I ask you for the details of your test.
>> If you mean hisilicon SAS,
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> the interrupt load should have been distributed
>> well given the device has multiple reply queues for distributing
>> interrupt
>> load.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So could you describe your case in a bit detail? Then we can
>>>> confirm
>>>> if this change is really needed.
>>>
>>> The issue is that the CPU is saturated in servicing the hard and
>>> threaded
>>> part of the interrupt together - here's the sort of thing which we
>>> saw
>>> previously:
>>> Before:
>>> CPU %usr %sys %irq %soft %idle
>>> all 2.9 13.1 1.2 4.6 78.2
>>> 0 0.0 29.3 10.1 58.6 2.0
>>> 1 18.2 39.4 0.0 1.0 41.4
>>> 2 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 98.0
>>>
>>> CPU0 has no effectively no idle.
>> The result just shows the saturation, we need to root cause it
>> instead
>> of workaround it via random changes.
>>
>>>
>>> Then, by allowing the threaded part to roam:
>>> After:
>>> CPU %usr %sys %irq %soft %idle
>>> all 3.5 18.4 2.7 6.8 68.6
>>> 0 0.0 20.6 29.9 29.9 19.6
>>> 1 0.0 39.8 0.0 50.0 10.2
>>>
>>> Note: I think that I may be able to reduce the irq hard part load
>>> in the
>>> endpoint driver, but not that much such that we see still this
>>> issue.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For when the interrupt is managed, allow the threaded part to run
>>>>> on all
>>>>> cpus in the irq affinity mask.
>>>>
>>>> I remembered that performance drop is observed by this approach in
>>>> some
>>>> test.
>>>
>>> From checking the thread about the NVMe interrupt swamp, just
>>> switching to
>>> threaded handler alone degrades performance. I didn't see any
>>> specific
>>> results for this change from Long Li -
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/21/128
>> I am pretty clear the reason for Azure, which is caused by
>> aggressive interrupt
>> coalescing, and this behavior shouldn't be very common, and it can
>> be
>> addressed by the following patch:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2019-November/028008.html
>> Then please share your lockup story, such as, which HBA/drivers,
>> test steps,
>> if you complete IOs from multiple disks(LUNs) on single CPU, if you
>> have
>> multiple queues, how many active LUNs involved in the test, ...
>
> There is no lockup, just a potential performance boost in this
> change.
>
> My colleague Xiang Chen can provide specifics of the test, as he is
> the one running it.
>
> But one key bit of info - which I did not think most relevant before
> - that is we have 2x SAS controllers running the throughput test on
> the same host.
>
> As such, the completion queue interrupts would be spread identically
> over the CPUs for each controller. I notice that ARM GICv3 ITS
> interrupt controller (which we use) does not use the generic irq
> matrix allocator, which I think would really help with this.
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> Is there any reason for which we couldn't utilise of the generic irq
> matrix allocator for GICv3?
For a start, the ITS code predates the matrix allocator by about three
years. Also, my understanding of this allocator is that it allows
x86 to cope with a very small number of possible interrupt vectors
per CPU. The ITS doesn't have such issue, as:
1) the namespace is global, and not per CPU
2) the namespace is *huge*
Now, what property of the matrix allocator is the ITS code missing?
I'd be more than happy to improve it.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-10 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-06 14:35 [PATCH RFC 0/1] Threaded handler uses irq affinity for when the interrupt is managed John Garry
2019-12-06 14:35 ` [PATCH RFC 1/1] genirq: Make threaded handler use irq affinity for managed interrupt John Garry
2019-12-06 15:22 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-06 16:16 ` John Garry
2019-12-07 8:03 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-09 14:30 ` John Garry
2019-12-09 15:09 ` Hannes Reinecke
2019-12-09 15:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-09 15:25 ` Hannes Reinecke
2019-12-09 15:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-09 15:49 ` Qais Yousef
2019-12-09 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-10 1:43 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-10 9:45 ` John Garry
2019-12-10 10:06 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-10 10:28 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2019-12-10 10:59 ` John Garry
2019-12-10 11:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-10 12:05 ` John Garry
2019-12-10 18:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-11 9:41 ` John Garry
2019-12-13 10:07 ` John Garry
2019-12-13 10:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-13 12:08 ` John Garry
2019-12-14 10:59 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-11 17:09 ` John Garry
2019-12-12 22:38 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-13 11:12 ` John Garry
2019-12-13 13:18 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-13 15:43 ` John Garry
2019-12-13 17:12 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-13 17:50 ` John Garry
2019-12-14 13:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-16 10:47 ` John Garry
2019-12-16 11:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-16 14:17 ` John Garry
2019-12-16 18:00 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-16 18:50 ` John Garry
2019-12-20 11:30 ` John Garry
2019-12-20 14:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-20 15:38 ` John Garry
2019-12-20 16:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-20 23:31 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-23 9:07 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-23 10:26 ` John Garry
2019-12-23 10:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-23 11:35 ` John Garry
2019-12-24 1:59 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-24 11:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-12-25 0:48 ` Ming Lei
2020-01-02 10:35 ` John Garry
2020-01-03 0:46 ` Ming Lei
2020-01-03 10:41 ` John Garry
2020-01-03 11:29 ` Ming Lei
2020-01-03 11:50 ` John Garry
2020-01-04 12:03 ` Ming Lei
2020-05-30 7:46 ` [tip: irq/core] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Balance initial LPI affinity across CPUs tip-bot2 for Marc Zyngier
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=048746c22898849d28985c0f65cf2c2a@www.loen.fr \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chenxiang66@hisilicon.com \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).