From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCF02C4345F for ; Fri, 3 May 2024 19:18:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2B2876B0082; Fri, 3 May 2024 15:18:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 262A16B0083; Fri, 3 May 2024 15:18:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 12B5A6B0085; Fri, 3 May 2024 15:18:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97646B0082 for ; Fri, 3 May 2024 15:18:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin11.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60197A0F70 for ; Fri, 3 May 2024 19:18:23 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82078045686.11.E1AF3AB Received: from out-183.mta1.migadu.com (out-183.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.183]) by imf30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D7F80003 for ; Fri, 3 May 2024 19:18:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf30.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=V2BxOp6Z; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf30.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeel.butt@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.183 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeel.butt@linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1714763901; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=mckXklrCvW8qW39pcWOiZpvvEZSd/ILPXQUzKCJtjD8=; b=lfTW7JU5d3/0qRESO5STuAxJ26Ota6m3LQUpkHHi4GrGL0uy+qCEYoBR0DXfzhLHSqRCTR cKvGvzE6IdLsKQFRbGzU9tA+QigA3XwJXNMxZcBKfesp5rvTmPIQT0Dz/1PTLJgkU5MjXl eX+OIw8FxgjkDJJ6DGdLY32BaTAJNys= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf30.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=V2BxOp6Z; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf30.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeel.butt@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.183 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeel.butt@linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1714763901; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=222PxQGrO6ohwf/LF6E900sj7sbaUS8K9y51JOVBN0cerw6h409+Aq8smv9s4x3EojDGjS 0ivAfMWiQ5Xc2drzld7wRonm7c5IdtEFOjNkjmWP3M+SktR+eT6GY0lX32SB9R70PeZFKV 8jZ/s5v1zMy4WFSj/fHFXxi3B8Fey6o= Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 12:18:13 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1714763898; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=mckXklrCvW8qW39pcWOiZpvvEZSd/ILPXQUzKCJtjD8=; b=V2BxOp6ZWWszRo+ezP4vqmUAsMOz43rjBG7TStVGd9+e9l5CVUB72pTp2yzXXpYNsQFFw0 TS5ChN5xanrZZE1bD+BTlQyWWZU7A7d81b5Qq8cXa0yyZ+PgE1QMWIT7EHDnAdzyOOyk7g pa3WaVWrgo12UH9Fc5kOuLDUaSj54aM= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Shakeel Butt To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer Cc: Waiman Long , tj@kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, yosryahmed@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] cgroup/rstat: add cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock helpers and tracepoints Message-ID: <4gdfgo3njmej7a42x6x6x4b6tm267xmrfwedis4mq7f4mypfc7@4egtwzrfqkhp> References: <171457225108.4159924.12821205549807669839.stgit@firesoul> <30d64e25-561a-41c6-ab95-f0820248e9b6@redhat.com> <4a680b80-b296-4466-895a-13239b982c85@kernel.org> <203fdb35-f4cf-4754-9709-3c024eecade9@redhat.com> <42a6d218-206b-4f87-a8fa-ef42d107fb23@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42a6d218-206b-4f87-a8fa-ef42d107fb23@kernel.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Stat-Signature: rrtp37s84ftsgophyhijhbmxaqxzj4wo X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 31D7F80003 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-HE-Tag: 1714763900-5684 X-HE-Meta: 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 l787NVsD FnMqxanE/bOj5JNtlVdl1Ej2WadM0yh9V9h6tJeVeqrbms3yh5LJjpCH8mM4PMNnAoUKys2wgsDIWSPEp51/ONdN262BH/tQLcyPWZgd7uREiFh3dr4oFh98pWw== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.002344, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 04:00:20PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > [...] > > > > I may have mistakenly thinking the lock hold time refers to just the > > cpu_lock. Your reported times here are about the cgroup_rstat_lock. > > Right? If so, the numbers make sense to me. > > > > True, my reported number here are about the cgroup_rstat_lock. > Glad to hear, we are more aligned then :-) > > Given I just got some prod machines online with this patch > cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock tracepoints, I can give you some early results, > about hold-time for the cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock. Oh you have already shared the preliminary data. > > From this oneliner bpftrace commands: > > sudo bpftrace -e ' > tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock_contended { > @start[tid]=nsecs; @cnt[probe]=count()} > tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_locked { > $now=nsecs; > if (args->contended) { > @wait_per_cpu_ns=hist($now-@start[tid]); delete(@start[tid]);} > @cnt[probe]=count(); @locked[tid]=$now} > tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_unlock { > $now=nsecs; > @locked_per_cpu_ns=hist($now-@locked[tid]); delete(@locked[tid]); > @cnt[probe]=count()} > interval:s:1 {time("%H:%M:%S "); print(@wait_per_cpu_ns); > print(@locked_per_cpu_ns); print(@cnt); clear(@cnt);}' > > Results from one 1 sec period: > > 13:39:55 @wait_per_cpu_ns: > [512, 1K) 3 | | > [1K, 2K) 12 |@ | > [2K, 4K) 390 > |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@| > [4K, 8K) 70 |@@@@@@@@@ | > [8K, 16K) 24 |@@@ | > [16K, 32K) 183 |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ | > [32K, 64K) 11 |@ | > > @locked_per_cpu_ns: > [256, 512) 75592 |@ | > [512, 1K) 2537357 > |@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@| > [1K, 2K) 528615 |@@@@@@@@@@ | > [2K, 4K) 168519 |@@@ | > [4K, 8K) 162039 |@@@ | > [8K, 16K) 100730 |@@ | > [16K, 32K) 42276 | | > [32K, 64K) 1423 | | > [64K, 128K) 89 | | > > @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock_contended]: 3 /sec > @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_unlock]: 3200 /sec > @cnt[tracepoint:cgroup:cgroup_rstat_cpu_locked]: 3200 /sec > > > So, we see "flush-code-path" per-CPU-holding @locked_per_cpu_ns isn't > exceeding 128 usec. Hmm 128 usec is actually unexpectedly high. How does the cgroup hierarchy on your system looks like? How many cgroups have actual workloads running? Can the network softirqs run on any cpus or smaller set of cpus? I am assuming these softirqs are processing packets from any or all cgroups and thus have larger cgroup update tree. I wonder if you comment out MEMCG_SOCK stat update and still see the same holding time. > > My latency requirements, to avoid RX-queue overflow, with 1024 slots, > running at 25 Gbit/s, is 27.6 usec with small packets, and 500 usec > (0.5ms) with MTU size packets. This is very close to my latency > requirements. > > --Jesper >