From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
luto@kernel.org, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
hpa@zytor.com, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, willy@infradead.org, mgorman@suse.de,
jon.grimm@amd.com, bharata@amd.com, raghavendra.kt@amd.com,
boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
jgross@suse.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
Youssef Esmat <youssefesmat@chromium.org>,
Vineeth Pillai <vineethrp@google.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [POC][RFC][PATCH] sched: Extended Scheduler Time Slice
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 15:55:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231025135545.GG31201@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231025085434.35d5f9e0@gandalf.local.home>
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 08:54:34AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I didn't want to overload that for something completely different. This is
> not a "restartable sequence".
Your hack is arguably worse. At least rseq already exists and most
threads will already have it set up if you have a recent enough glibc.
> > So what if it doesn't ? Can we kill it for not playing nice ?
>
> No, it's no different than a system call running for a long time. You could
Then why ask for it? What's the point. Also, did you define
sched_yield() semantics for OTHER to something useful? Because if you
didn't you just invoked UB :-) We could be setting your pets on fire.
> set this bit and leave it there for as long as you want, and it should not
> affect anything.
It would affect the worst case interference terms of the system at the
very least.
> If you look at what Thomas's PREEMPT_AUTO.patch
I know what it does, it also means your thing doesn't work the moment
you set things up to have the old full-preempt semantics back. It
doesn't work in the presence of RT/DL tasks, etc..
More importantly, it doesn't work for RT/DL tasks, so having the bit set
and not having OTHER policy is an error.
Do you want an interface that randomly doesn't work ?
> We could possibly make it adjustable.
Tunables are not a good thing.
> The reason I've been told over the last few decades of why people implement
> 100% user space spin locks is because the overhead of going int the kernel
> is way too high.
Over the last few decades that has been a blatant falsehood. At some
point (right before the whole meltdown trainwreck) amluto had syscall
overhead down to less than 150 cycles.
Then of course meltdown happened and it all went to shit.
But even today (on good hardware or with mitigations=off):
gettid-1m: 179,650,423 cycles
xadd-1m: 23,036,564 cycles
syscall is the cost of roughly 8 atomic ops. More expensive, sure. But
not insanely so. I've seen atomic ops go up to >1000 cycles if you
contend them hard enough.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-25 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-25 9:42 Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 9:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-25 12:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 13:55 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2023-10-25 14:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 14:53 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-10-25 15:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 15:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-10-25 16:24 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-10-25 17:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 18:49 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-10-25 19:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 21:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-10-26 8:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-26 13:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-26 15:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-26 16:31 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira
2023-10-26 17:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-26 8:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-26 13:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-30 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-30 13:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-26 5:03 ` Ankur Arora
2023-10-25 15:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-25 15:34 ` Rasmus Villemoes
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=20231025135545.GG31201@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ankur.a.arora@oracle.com \
--cc=bharata@amd.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bristot@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=jon.grimm@amd.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@amd.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vineethrp@google.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=youssefesmat@chromium.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