From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
To: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@matbug.net>,
Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] sched: Optionally skip uclamp logic in fast path
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:00:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7aa76981-85f2-f73a-9bbb-d40b3eb38f6c@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200625154352.24767-1-qais.yousef@arm.com>
Hi Qais,
On 6/25/20 4:43 PM, Qais Yousef wrote:
> This series attempts to address the report that uclamp logic could be expensive
> sometimes and shows a regression in netperf UDP_STREAM under certain
> conditions.
>
> The first patch is a fix for how struct uclamp_rq is initialized which is
> required by the 2nd patch which contains the real 'fix'.
>
> Worth noting that the root cause of the overhead is believed to be system
> specific or related to potential certain code/data layout issues, leading to
> worse I/D $ performance.
>
> Different systems exhibited different behaviors and the regression did
> disappear in certain kernel version while attempting to reporoduce.
>
> More info can be found here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200616110824.dgkkbyapn3io6wik@e107158-lin/
>
> Having the static key seemed the best thing to do to ensure the effect of
> uclamp is minimized for kernels that compile it in but don't have a userspace
> that uses it, which will allow distros to distribute uclamp capable kernels by
> default without having to compromise on performance for some systems that could
> be affected.
>
> Changes in v4:
> * Fix broken boosting of RT tasks when static key is disabled.
>
> Changes in v3:
> * Avoid double negatives and rename the static key to uclamp_used
> * Unconditionally enable the static key through any of the paths where
> the user can modify the default uclamp value.
> * Use C99 named struct initializer for struct uclamp_rq which is easier
> to read than the memset().
>
> Changes in v2:
> * Add more info in the commit message about the result of perf diff to
> demonstrate that the activate/deactivate_task pressure is reduced in
> the fast path.
>
> * Fix sparse warning reported by the test robot.
>
> * Add an extra commit about using static_branch_likely() instead of
> static_branc_unlikely().
>
I've tried this v4 series with mmtest netperf-udp (30x each UDP
size) - results are good (just double checking and making sure
the tag indicating that v4 was tested can be applied).
v5.7-rc7-base-noucl v5.7-rc7-ucl-tsk-nofix
v5.7-rc7-ucl-tsk-grp-fix_v4
Hmean send-64 62.15 ( 0.00%) 59.65 * -4.02%*
65.86 * 5.97%*
Hmean send-128 122.88 ( 0.00%) 119.37 * -2.85%*
131.75 * 7.22%*
Hmean send-256 244.85 ( 0.00%) 234.26 * -4.32%*
259.33 * 5.92%*
Hmean send-1024 919.24 ( 0.00%) 880.67 * -4.20%*
979.49 * 6.55%*
Hmean send-2048 1689.45 ( 0.00%) 1647.54 * -2.48%*
1805.21 * 6.85%*
Hmean send-3312 2542.36 ( 0.00%) 2485.23 * -2.25%*
2658.30 * 4.56%*
Hmean send-4096 2935.69 ( 0.00%) 2861.09 * -2.54%*
3083.08 * 5.02%*
Hmean send-8192 4800.35 ( 0.00%) 4680.09 * -2.51%*
4984.22 * 3.83%*
Hmean send-16384 7473.66 ( 0.00%) 7349.60 * -1.66%*
7703.88 * 3.08%*
Hmean recv-64 62.15 ( 0.00%) 59.65 * -4.03%*
65.85 * 5.96%*
Hmean recv-128 122.88 ( 0.00%) 119.37 * -2.85%*
131.74 * 7.21%*
Hmean recv-256 244.84 ( 0.00%) 234.26 * -4.32%*
259.33 * 5.92%*
Hmean recv-1024 919.24 ( 0.00%) 880.67 * -4.20%*
979.46 * 6.55%*
Hmean recv-2048 1689.44 ( 0.00%) 1647.54 * -2.48%*
1805.17 * 6.85%*
Hmean recv-3312 2542.36 ( 0.00%) 2485.23 * -2.25%*
2657.67 * 4.54%*
Hmean recv-4096 2935.69 ( 0.00%) 2861.09 * -2.54%*
3082.58 * 5.00%*
Hmean recv-8192 4800.35 ( 0.00%) 4678.15 * -2.55%*
4982.49 * 3.79%*
Hmean recv-16384 7473.63 ( 0.00%) 7349.52 * -1.66%*
7701.53 * 3.05%*
You can add my:
Tested-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
If anyone would like to see some other tests, please let me know,
maybe I can setup something.
Regards,
Lukasz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-26 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-25 15:43 [PATCH v4 0/2] sched: Optionally skip uclamp logic in fast path Qais Yousef
2020-06-25 15:43 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] sched/uclamp: Fix initialization of struct uclamp_rq Qais Yousef
2020-06-26 12:32 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-26 23:17 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-06-29 12:12 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-25 15:43 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] sched/uclamp: Protect uclamp fast path code with static key Qais Yousef
2020-06-26 12:38 ` Patrick Bellasi
2020-06-26 23:21 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-06-29 12:21 ` Qais Yousef
2020-06-26 10:00 ` Lukasz Luba [this message]
2020-06-26 10:27 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] sched: Optionally skip uclamp logic in fast path Peter Zijlstra
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=7aa76981-85f2-f73a-9bbb-d40b3eb38f6c@arm.com \
--to=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chris.redpath@arm.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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).