linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	xen-devel-request@lists.xenproject.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, x86@kernel.org
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
	mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
	kernellwp@gmail.com, jgross@suse.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	bsingharora@gmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	borntraeger@de.ibm.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com,
	David.Laight@ACULAB.COM, dave@stgolabs.net,
	konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
	Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v7 03/11] kernel/locking: Drop the overload of {mutex, rwsem}_spin_on_owner
Date: Wed,  2 Nov 2016 05:08:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1478077718-37424-4-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1478077718-37424-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

An over-committed guest with more vCPUs than pCPUs has a heavy overload
in the two spin_on_owner. This blames on the lock holder preemption
issue.

Kernel has an interface bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu) to see if a vCPU
is currently running or not. So break the spin loops on true condition.

test-case:
perf record -a perf bench sched messaging -g 400 -p && perf report

before patch:
20.68%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_spin_on_owner
 8.45%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_unlock
 4.12%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call
 3.01%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call_common
 2.83%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] copypage_power7
 2.64%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] rwsem_spin_on_owner
 2.00%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] osq_lock

after patch:
 9.99%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] mutex_unlock
 5.28%  sched-messaging  [unknown]         [H] 0xc0000000000768e0
 4.27%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] __copy_tofrom_user_power7
 3.77%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] copypage_power7
 3.24%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] _raw_write_lock_irq
 3.02%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] system_call
 2.69%  sched-messaging  [kernel.vmlinux]  [k] wait_consider_task

Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
---
 kernel/locking/mutex.c      | 13 +++++++++++--
 kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 14 +++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
index a70b90d..24face6 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
@@ -236,7 +236,11 @@ bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner)
 		 */
 		barrier();
 
-		if (!owner->on_cpu || need_resched()) {
+		/*
+		 * Use vcpu_is_preempted to detect lock holder preemption issue.
+		 */
+		if (!owner->on_cpu || need_resched() ||
+				vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner))) {
 			ret = false;
 			break;
 		}
@@ -261,8 +265,13 @@ static inline int mutex_can_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock)
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
 	owner = READ_ONCE(lock->owner);
+
+	/*
+	 * As lock holder preemption issue, we both skip spinning if task is not
+	 * on cpu or its cpu is preempted
+	 */
 	if (owner)
-		retval = owner->on_cpu;
+		retval = owner->on_cpu && !vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner));
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	/*
 	 * if lock->owner is not set, the mutex owner may have just acquired
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
index 2337b4b..b664ce1 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c
@@ -336,7 +336,11 @@ static inline bool rwsem_can_spin_on_owner(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 		goto done;
 	}
 
-	ret = owner->on_cpu;
+	/*
+	 * As lock holder preemption issue, we both skip spinning if task is not
+	 * on cpu or its cpu is preempted
+	 */
+	ret = owner->on_cpu && !vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner));
 done:
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	return ret;
@@ -362,8 +366,12 @@ static noinline bool rwsem_spin_on_owner(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
 		 */
 		barrier();
 
-		/* abort spinning when need_resched or owner is not running */
-		if (!owner->on_cpu || need_resched()) {
+		/*
+		 * abort spinning when need_resched or owner is not running or
+		 * owner's cpu is preempted.
+		 */
+		if (!owner->on_cpu || need_resched() ||
+				vcpu_is_preempted(task_cpu(owner))) {
 			rcu_read_unlock();
 			return false;
 		}
-- 
2.4.11

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-02  5:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-02  9:08 [PATCH v7 00/11] implement vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 01/11] kernel/sched: introduce vcpu preempted check interface Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 02/11] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq_lock() Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` Pan Xinhui [this message]
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 04/11] powerpc/spinlock: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 05/11] s390/spinlock: Provide vcpu_is_preempted Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 06/11] x86, paravirt: Add interface to support kvm/xen vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-11-15 15:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-16  4:19     ` Pan Xinhui
2016-11-16 10:23       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-16 11:29         ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-11-16 11:43           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-17  5:16         ` Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 07/11] KVM: Introduce kvm_write_guest_offset_cached Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 08/11] x86, kvm/x86.c: support vcpu preempted check Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 09/11] x86, kernel/kvm.c: " Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 10/11] x86, xen: " Pan Xinhui
2016-11-02  9:08 ` [PATCH v7 11/11] Documentation: virtual: kvm: Support " Pan Xinhui

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=1478077718-37424-4-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=kernellwp@gmail.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel-request@lists.xenproject.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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 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).