From: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, ak@suse.de, shai@scalex86.org,
pravin.shelar@calsoftinc.com
Subject: Re: High lock spin time for zone->lru_lock under extreme conditions
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:53:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070113195334.GC4234@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070113000017.2ad2df12.akpm@osdl.org>
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 12:00:17AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:36:43 -0800 Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org> wrote:
> > > >void __lockfunc _spin_lock_irq(spinlock_t *lock)
> > > >{
> > > > local_irq_disable();
> > > > ------------------------> rdtsc(t1);
> > > > preempt_disable();
> > > > spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
> > > > _raw_spin_lock(lock);
> > > > ------------------------> rdtsc(t2);
> > > > if (lock->spin_time < (t2 - t1))
> > > > lock->spin_time = t2 - t1;
> > > >}
> > > >
> > > >On some runs, we found that the zone->lru_lock spun for 33 seconds or more
> > > >while the maximal CS time was 3 seconds or so.
> > >
> > > What is the "CS time"?
> >
> > Critical Section :). This is the maximal time interval I measured from
> > t2 above to the time point we release the spin lock. This is the hold
> > time I guess.
>
> By no means. The theory here is that CPUA is taking and releasing the
> lock at high frequency, but CPUB never manages to get in and take it. In
> which case the maximum-acquisition-time is much larger than the
> maximum-hold-time.
>
> I'd suggest that you use a similar trick to measure the maximum hold time:
> start the timer after we got the lock, stop it just before we release the
> lock (assuming that the additional rdtsc delay doesn't "fix" things, of
> course...)
Well, that is exactly what I described above as CS time. The
instrumentation goes like this:
void __lockfunc _spin_lock_irq(spinlock_t *lock)
{
unsigned long long t1,t2;
local_irq_disable();
t1 = get_cycles_sync();
preempt_disable();
spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_);
_raw_spin_lock(lock);
t2 = get_cycles_sync();
lock->raw_lock.htsc = t2;
if (lock->spin_time < (t2 - t1))
lock->spin_time = t2 - t1;
}
...
void __lockfunc _spin_unlock_irq(spinlock_t *lock)
{
unsigned long long t1 ;
spin_release(&lock->dep_map, 1, _RET_IP_);
t1 = get_cycles_sync();
if (lock->cs_time < (t1 - lock->raw_lock.htsc))
lock->cs_time = t1 - lock->raw_lock.htsc;
_raw_spin_unlock(lock);
local_irq_enable();
preempt_enable();
}
Am I missing something? Is this not what you just described? (The
synchronizing rdtsc might not be really required at all locations, but I
doubt if it would contribute a significant fraction to 33s or even
the 3s hold time on a 2.6 GHZ opteron).
--
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:[~2007-01-13 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-12 16:01 Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-01-12 17:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-01-12 19:46 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-01-12 21:25 ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-12 21:40 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-01-12 21:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-01-13 1:00 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-01-13 1:11 ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-13 7:42 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-01-13 4:39 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-13 7:36 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2007-01-13 7:53 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-13 8:00 ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-13 19:53 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai [this message]
2007-01-13 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2007-01-16 2:56 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
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=20070113195334.GC4234@localhost.localdomain \
--to=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=pravin.shelar@calsoftinc.com \
--cc=shai@scalex86.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