From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Srinivas Eeda <srinivas.eeda@oracle.com>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "x86/hpet: Reduce HPET counter read contention"
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 11:35:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <06512b71-c163-7851-1881-31a4c35fc495@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad2ab867-d39a-8d71-f76e-da820f9d2faa@oracle.com>
On 03/18/2019 04:44 AM, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>
> On 2019/3/15 22:17, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 03/15/2019 05:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:42:12PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>>>> This reverts commit f99fd22e4d4bc84880a8a3117311bbf0e3a6a9dc.
>>>>
>>>> It's unnecessory after commit "acpi_pm: Fix bootup softlockup due
>>>> to PMTMR
>>>> counter read contention", the simple HPET access code could be
>>>> restored.
>>>>
>>>> On a general system with good TSC, TSC is the final default
>>>> clocksource.
>>>> So the potential performce loss is only at bootup stage before TSC
>>>> replacing HPET, we didn't observe obvious delay of bootup.
>>> The timeline here is:
>>>
>>> - Len took out SKX from native_calibrate_tsc
>>> b51120309348 ("x86/tsc: Fix erroneous TSC rate on Skylake Xeon")
>>>
>>> This causes the TSC to run through the calibration code, which
>>> completes _after_ SMP bringup.
>>>
>>> - This then caused HPET to be used during SMP bringup, which resulted
>>> in Waiman doing the patch you now propose removing.
>>>
>>> Because large (multi-socket) SKX machines would barely boot.
>>>
>>> f99fd22e4d4b ("x86/hpet: Reduce HPET counter read contention")
>>>
>>> - Now, I figured that was all crazy to begin with, and introduced
>>> clocksource_tsc_early, such that we can run at the guestimate TSC
>>> frequency until we've completed calibration and then swap to the
>>> real
>>> TSC clocksource.
>>>
>>> aa83c45762a2 ("x86/tsc: Introduce early tsc clocksource")
>>> (and assorted fixes)
>>>
>>> This means that we now only use HPET for a very short time in early
>>> boot, _IFF_ TSC is stable.
>>>
>>> Now, given the amount of wreckage we still see with TSC, I'm very
>>> reluctant to revert this patch. Because the moment TSC goes out the
>>> window, we're back on HPET, and this patch does make a huge difference.
>>>
>>> Yes, its sad, gross and nasty... but the same is true for TSC still
>>> being
>>> a trainwreck.
>>>
>>> So NAK.
>> I concur. In the uncontended case, the overhead is mostly just the
>> additional cmpxchg instruction for acquiring the spinlock. Even then, it
>> isn't significant when compared with the time needed to actually read
>> from the HPET. Without that code, any fallback to HPET for whatever
>> reason will likely see degradation in performance especially on systems
>> with large number of CPUs.
>
> Thank Peter and Waiman for reply.
>
> I see, we still care the performance on a system with wreckage TSC.
>
>
> So now we come back to the old question, do we care the softlockup
>
> and the performance when pmtmr is chosed for whatever reason?
>
> For which I had provide two different fixes:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/1/22/1172
>
> and
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/3/15/101
>
I think what Thomas was asking is to provide a REALISTIC use case where
TSC is wrecked and HPET is somehow not used and we have to fall back to
use PM timer. If such use case exists, I am sure Thomas will be happy to
take it.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-18 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-14 8:42 [PATCH 1/2] acpi_pm: Fix bootup softlockup due to PMTMR counter read contention Zhenzhong Duan
2019-03-14 8:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] Revert "x86/hpet: Reduce HPET counter read contention" Zhenzhong Duan
2019-03-15 9:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-15 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-15 14:17 ` Waiman Long
2019-03-18 8:44 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2019-03-18 15:35 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2019-03-20 10:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=06512b71-c163-7851-1881-31a4c35fc495@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=srinivas.eeda@oracle.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhenzhong.duan@oracle.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 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).