From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Matthew R Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rwsem: performance enhancements for systems with many cores
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:43:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1371861805.13136.23.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANN689G1hyV_+2DxOiLqHDLGGuCjAqn9GhV-g4A0Jfd6YRQupQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 17:25 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-06-21 at 16:51 -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> >> In this patchset, we introduce two optimizations to read write semaphore.
> >> The first one reduces cache bouncing of the sem->count field
> >> by doing a pre-read of the sem->count and avoid cmpxchg if possible.
> >> The second patch introduces similar optimistic spining logic in
> >> the mutex code for the writer lock acquisition of rw-sem.
> >>
> >> Combining the two patches, in testing by Davidlohr Bueso on aim7 workloads
> >> on 8 socket 80 cores system, he saw improvements of
> >> alltests (+14.5%), custom (+17%), disk (+11%), high_systime
> >> (+5%), shared (+15%) and short (+4%), most of them after around 500
> >> users when i_mmap was implemented as rwsem.
> >>
> >> Feedbacks on the effectiveness of these tweaks on other workloads
> >> will be appreciated.
> >
> > Tim, I was really hoping to send all this in one big bundle. I was doing
> > some further testing (enabling hyperthreading and some Oracle runs),
> > fortunately everything looks ok and we are getting actual improvements
> > on large boxes.
> >
> > That said, how about I send you my i_mmap rwsem patchset for a v2 of
> > this patchset?
>
> I'm a bit confused about the state of these patchsets - it looks like
> I'm only copied into half of the conversations. Should I wait for a v2
> here, or should I hunt down for Alex's version of things, or... ?
Except for some internal patch logistics, you haven't been left out on
any conversations :)
My original plan was to send out, in one patchset:
- rwsem optimizations from Alex (patch 1/2 here, which should be
actually 4 patches) +
- rwsem optimistic spinning (patch 2/2 here) +
- i_mmap_mutex to rwsem conversion (5 more patches)
Now, I realize that the i_mmap stuff might not be welcomed in a
rwsem-specific optimizations patchset like this one, but I think it's
relevant to include everything in a single bundle as it really shows the
performance boosts and it's what I have been using and measuring the
original negative rwsem performance when compared to a mutex.
If folks don't agree, I can always send it as a separate patchset.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
the rwsem spin on owner functionality (2/2) + 4 from Alex )which is
really patch 1/2 here + I haven't sent out any
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-22 0:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-21 23:51 Tim Chen
2013-06-22 0:00 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-06-22 0:25 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-06-22 0:43 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2013-06-24 17:47 ` Tim Chen
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=1371861805.13136.23.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net \
--to=davidlohr.bueso@hp.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=walken@google.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