From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423186AbbEENAl (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 09:00:41 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:49784 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423154AbbEENAd (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 09:00:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 15:00:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Eric Dumazet cc: Peter Zijlstra , viresh kumar , Ingo Molnar , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, LKML , Steven Miao , shashim@codeaurora.org, Frederic Weisbecker , "Paul E. McKenney" , cl@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] timer: Avoid waking up an idle-core by migrate running timer In-Reply-To: <1429987050.22254.187.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Message-ID: References: <80182e47a7103608d2ddab7f62c0c3dffc99fdcc.1427782893.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <5530C086.2020700@linaro.org> <1429653295.18561.16.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <20150422152940.GC3007@worktop.Skamania.guest> <1429718577.18561.103.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1429732743.18561.134.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1429772251.22254.35.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1429987050.22254.187.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 14:45 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > You definitely have a point from the high throughput networking > > perspective. > > > > Though in a power optimizing scenario with minimal network traffic > > this might be the wrong decision. We have to gather data from the > > power maniacs whether this matters or not. The FULL_NO_HZ camp might > > be pretty unhappy about the above. > > Sure, I understand. > > > To make this clear, here the profile on a moderately loaded TCP server, > pushing ~20Gbits of data. Most of TCP output is ACK clock driven (thus > from softirq context). > > (using regular sendmsg() system calls, that why the > get_nohz_timer_target() is 'only' second in the profile, but add the > find_next_bit() to it and this is very close being at first position) > > > > PerfTop: 4712 irqs/sec kernel:96.7% exact: 0.0% [4000Hz cycles], (all, 72 CPUs) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 10.16% [kernel] [k] copy_user_enhanced_fast_string > 5.66% [kernel] [k] get_nohz_timer_target > 5.59% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock > 2.53% [kernel] [k] __netif_receive_skb_core > 2.27% [kernel] [k] find_next_bit > 1.90% [kernel] [k] tcp_ack > > Maybe a reasonable heuristic would be to > change /proc/sys/kernel/timer_migration default to 0 on hosts with more > than 32 cpus. > > profile with timer_migration = 0 > > PerfTop: 3656 irqs/sec kernel:94.3% exact: 0.0% [4000Hz cycles], (all, 72 CPUs) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 13.95% [kernel] [k] copy_user_enhanced_fast_string > 4.65% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock > 2.57% [kernel] [k] __netif_receive_skb_core > 2.33% [kernel] [k] tcp_ack Is that with the static key patch applied? Thanks, tglx