From: Subhra Mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>
To: Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, pjt@google.com,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
keescook@chromium.org, kerrnel@google.com,
Vineeth Pillai <vpillai@digitalocean.com>,
Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@digitalocean.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/16] sched: Wrap rq::lock access
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:02:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <af1e1aa1-7965-eb53-bbd9-079253eb83ba@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fcad329b-e421-624a-0d1a-a98466eaf2ed@oracle.com>
On 3/22/19 5:06 PM, Subhra Mazumdar wrote:
>
> On 3/21/19 2:20 PM, Julien Desfossez wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 10:31 PM Subhra Mazumdar
>> <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On 3/18/19 8:41 AM, Julien Desfossez wrote:
>>>
>> On further investigation, we could see that the contention is mostly
>> in the
>> way rq locks are taken. With this patchset, we lock the whole core if
>> cpu.tag is set for at least one cgroup. Due to this, __schedule() is
>> more or
>> less serialized for the core and that attributes to the performance loss
>> that we are seeing. We also saw that newidle_balance() takes
>> considerably
>> long time in load_balance() due to the rq spinlock contention. Do you
>> think
>> it would help if the core-wide locking was only performed when
>> absolutely
>> needed ?
>>
> Is the core wide lock primarily responsible for the regression? I ran
> upto patch
> 12 which also has the core wide lock for tagged cgroups and also calls
> newidle_balance() from pick_next_task(). I don't see any regression.
> Of course
> the core sched version of pick_next_task() may be doing more but
> comparing with
> the __pick_next_task() it doesn't look too horrible.
I gathered some data with only 1 DB instance running (which also has 52%
slow
down). Following are the numbers of pick_next_task() calls and their avg
cost
for patch 12 and patch 15. The total number of calls seems to be similar
but the
avg cost (in us) has more than doubled. For both the patches I had put
the DB
instance into a cpu tagged cgroup.
patch12 patch15
count pick_next_task 62317898 58925395
avg cost pick_next_task 0.6566323209 1.4223810108
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-27 1:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-18 16:56 [RFC][PATCH 00/16] sched: Core scheduling Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/16] stop_machine: Fix stop_cpus_in_progress ordering Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/16] sched: Fix kerneldoc comment for ia64_set_curr_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/16] sched: Wrap rq::lock access Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-19 16:13 ` Phil Auld
2019-02-19 16:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-19 16:37 ` Phil Auld
2019-03-18 15:41 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-03-20 2:29 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-21 21:20 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-03-22 13:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-22 20:59 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-03-23 0:06 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-27 1:02 ` Subhra Mazumdar [this message]
2019-03-29 13:35 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-03-29 22:23 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-04-01 21:35 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-04-03 20:16 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-04-05 1:30 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-04-02 7:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-22 23:28 ` Tim Chen
2019-03-22 23:44 ` Tim Chen
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/16] sched/{rt,deadline}: Fix set_next_task vs pick_next_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/16] sched: Add task_struct pointer to sched_class::set_curr_task Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/16] sched/fair: Export newidle_balance() Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/16] sched: Allow put_prev_task() to drop rq->lock Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/16] sched: Rework pick_next_task() slow-path Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/16] sched: Introduce sched_class::pick_task() Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/16] sched: Core-wide rq->lock Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/16] sched: Basic tracking of matching tasks Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/16] sched: A quick and dirty cgroup tagging interface Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/16] sched: Add core wide task selection and scheduling Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <20190402064612.GA46500@aaronlu>
2019-04-02 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-02 13:20 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-05 14:55 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-09 18:09 ` Tim Chen
2019-04-10 4:36 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-10 14:18 ` Aubrey Li
2019-04-11 2:11 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-10 14:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-11 3:05 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-11 9:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-10 8:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-10 19:58 ` Vineeth Remanan Pillai
2019-04-15 16:59 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-04-16 13:43 ` Aaron Lu
2019-04-09 18:38 ` Julien Desfossez
2019-04-10 15:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-11 0:11 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-04-19 8:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-19 23:16 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 14/16] sched/fair: Add a few assertions Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 15/16] sched: Trivial forced-newidle balancer Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-21 16:19 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-02-21 16:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-21 16:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-21 18:28 ` Valentin Schneider
2019-04-04 8:31 ` Aubrey Li
2019-04-06 1:36 ` Aubrey Li
2019-02-18 16:56 ` [RFC][PATCH 16/16] sched: Debug bits Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-18 17:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/16] sched: Core scheduling Linus Torvalds
2019-02-18 20:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-19 0:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-02-19 15:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-02-22 12:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-02-22 14:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-22 19:26 ` Tim Chen
2019-02-26 8:26 ` Aubrey Li
2019-02-27 7:54 ` Aubrey Li
2019-02-21 2:53 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-02-21 14:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-21 18:44 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-02-22 0:34 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-02-22 12:45 ` Mel Gorman
2019-02-22 16:10 ` Mel Gorman
2019-03-08 19:44 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-11 4:23 ` Aubrey Li
2019-03-11 18:34 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-11 23:33 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-12 0:20 ` Greg Kerr
2019-03-12 0:47 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-12 7:33 ` Aaron Lu
2019-03-12 7:45 ` Aubrey Li
2019-03-13 5:55 ` Aubrey Li
2019-03-14 0:35 ` Tim Chen
2019-03-14 5:30 ` Aubrey Li
2019-03-14 6:07 ` Li, Aubrey
2019-03-18 6:56 ` Aubrey Li
2019-03-12 19:07 ` Pawan Gupta
2019-03-26 7:32 ` Aaron Lu
2019-03-26 7:56 ` Aaron Lu
2019-02-19 22:07 ` Greg Kerr
2019-02-20 9:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-20 18:33 ` Greg Kerr
2019-02-22 14:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-07 22:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-02-20 18:43 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-01 2:54 ` Subhra Mazumdar
2019-03-14 15:28 ` Julien Desfossez
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=af1e1aa1-7965-eb53-bbd9-079253eb83ba@oracle.com \
--to=subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jdesfossez@digitalocean.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kerrnel@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=naravamudan@digitalocean.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vpillai@digitalocean.com \
/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.