All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	williams@redhat.com, luto@kernel.org, fweisbec@redhat.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 11:20:49 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <554399D1.6010405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150501064044.GA18957@gmail.com>

On 05/01/2015 02:40 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>> This patch builds on top of these patches by Paolo:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/28/188
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/29/139
>>
>> Together with this patch I posted earlier this week, the syscall path
>> on a nohz_full cpu seems to be about 10% faster.
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/24/394
>>
>> My test is a simple microbenchmark that calls getpriority() in a loop
>> 10 million times:
>>
>> 		run time	system time
>> vanilla		5.49s		2.08s
>> __acct patch	5.21s		1.92s
>> both patches	4.88s		1.71s
>
> Just curious, what are the numbers if you don't have context tracking 
> enabled, i.e. without nohz_full?
> 
> I.e. what's the baseline we are talking about?

It's an astounding difference. This is not a kernel without nohz_full,
just a CPU without nohz_full running the same kernel I tested with
yesterday:

 		run time	system time
vanilla		5.49s		2.08s
__acct patch	5.21s		1.92s
both patches	4.88s		1.71s
CPU w/o nohz	3.12s		1.63s    <-- your numbers, mostly

What is even more interesting is that the majority of the time
difference seems to come from _user_ time, which has gone down
from around 3.4 seconds in the vanilla kernel to around 1.5 seconds
on the CPU without nohz_full enabled...

At syscall entry time, the nohz_full context tracking code is very
straightforward. We check thread_info->flags & _TIF_WORK_SYSCALL_ENTRY,
and call syscall_trace_enter_phase1, which handles USER -> KERNEL
context transition.

Syscall exit time is a convoluted mess. Both do_notify_resume and
syscall_trace_leave call exit_user() on entry and enter_user()
on exit, leaving the time spent looping around between int_with_check
and syscall_return: in entry_64.S accounted as user time.

I sent an email about this last night, it may be useful to add a
third test & function call point to the syscall return code, where
we can call user_enter() just ONCE, and remove the other context
tracking calls from that loop.

-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-01 15:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 83+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-30 21:23 [PATCH 0/3] reduce nohz_full syscall overhead by 10% riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] reduce indentation in __acct_update_integrals riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] remove local_irq_save from __acct_update_integrals riel
2015-04-30 21:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry riel
2015-04-30 21:56   ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01  6:40   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 15:20     ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-05-01 15:59       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:03         ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-01 16:21           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:26             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:34               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 18:05                 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 18:40                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 19:11                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 19:37                       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-02  5:27                         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-02 18:27                           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-03 18:41                           ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 10:35                             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-04  9:26                           ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-05-04 13:30                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 14:06                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 14:19                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 15:59                             ` question about RCU dynticks_nesting Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 18:39                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 19:39                                 ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:02                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 20:13                                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:38                                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 20:53                                         ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-05  5:54                                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-06  1:49                                             ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  3:44                                               ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  6:06                                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-06  6:52                                                   ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-06  7:01                                                     ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-07  0:59                                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-05-07 15:44                                             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 19:00                               ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 19:39                                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-04 19:59                                   ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-04 20:40                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 10:53                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 12:34                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 13:00                                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 18:35                                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 21:09                                           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-06  5:41                                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-05 10:48                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 10:51                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 12:30                                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-02  4:06                   ` [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry Mike Galbraith
2015-05-01 16:37             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:40               ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:45                 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:54                   ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 17:12                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 17:22                       ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 17:59                         ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 16:22           ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-01 16:27             ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-03 13:23       ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-03 17:30         ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-03 18:24           ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-03 18:52             ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-07 10:48               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:18                 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2015-05-07 12:29                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 15:47                     ` Rik van Riel
2015-05-08  7:58                       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:22                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 12:44                   ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 12:49                     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08  6:17                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-07 12:52                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-07 15:08                       ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-07 17:47                         ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08  6:37                           ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08 10:59                             ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08 11:27                               ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-08 12:56                                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-08 13:27                                   ` Ingo Molnar

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=554399D1.6010405@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@redhat.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=williams@redhat.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.