From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, 1vier1@web.de,
felixh@informatik.uni-bremen.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipc/sem: sem_lock with hysteresis
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 19:37:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fb23c7da-52a3-5e90-6c45-10e33d80417b@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160621202902.GB3790@linux-80c1.suse>
On 06/21/2016 10:29 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
>> sysv sem has two lock modes: One with per-semaphore locks, one lock mode
>> with a single big lock for the whole array.
>> When switching from the per-semaphore locks to the big lock, all
>> per-semaphore locks must be scanned for ongoing operations.
>>
>> The patch adds a hysteresis for switching from the big lock to the per
>> semaphore locks. This reduces how often the per-semaphore locks must
>> be scanned.
>
> Isn't this very arbitrary depending on the workload? Ie the other way
> around:
> when we have a lot more simple ops going on not so good. While I'm
> more worried
> about combinations that could cause enough complex ops to always delay
> taking
> the finer grained lock, this change also obviously makes simple ops
> more expensive
> on newly created segments.
I
Entering complex mode requires a scan of sem_base[].sem_lock.
> for (i = 0; i < sma->sem_nsems; i++) {
> sem = sma->sem_base + i;
> spin_unlock_wait(&sem->lock);
This is what the patch tries to avoid.
>
> In general I don't trust magic numbers much. What sort of numbers have
> you seen
> with this patch? Is this a real concern (particularly because a lot of
> the sem->lock
> work was because real world workloads were doing a lot more simple ops
> afaicr)?
>
With a microbenchmark: As much improvement as you want :-)
- Only simple ops: patch has no impact (the first 10 semops do not matter)
- sleeping complex ops: patch has no impact, we are always in complex mode
- not sleeping complex ops: depends on the size of the array.
With a 4.000 semaphore array, I see an improvement of factor 20.
There is obviously one case where the patch causes a slowdown:
- complex op, then 11 simple ops, then repeat.
Perhaps: set COMPLEX_MODE_ENTER to 1 or 2, then allow to configure it
from user space.
Or do not merge the patch and wait until someone come with a profile
that shows complexmode_enter().
--
Manfred
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-25 17:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-15 5:23 linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-18 19:39 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-06-18 20:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] ipc/sem.c: Fix complex_count vs. simple op race Manfred Spraul
2016-06-18 20:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] ipc/sem: sem_lock with hysteresis Manfred Spraul
2016-06-21 20:29 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-06-25 17:37 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2016-06-28 17:54 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-06-20 23:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] ipc/sem.c: Fix complex_count vs. simple op race Andrew Morton
2016-06-23 18:55 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-06-21 0:30 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-06-23 19:22 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-06-28 5:27 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-06-30 19:28 ` Manfred Spraul
2016-07-01 16:52 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-06-25 17:37 [PATCH 0/2] ipc/sem.c: sem_lock fixes Manfred Spraul
2016-06-25 17:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] ipc/sem.c: Fix complex_count vs. simple op race Manfred Spraul
2016-06-25 17:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] ipc/sem: sem_lock with hysteresis Manfred Spraul
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=fb23c7da-52a3-5e90-6c45-10e33d80417b@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=1vier1@web.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=felixh@informatik.uni-bremen.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--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).