Re: [PATCH 0/3] use rwlock in order to reduce ep_poll_callback() contention

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2018-12-13 19:13, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On 2018-12-12 03:03, Roman Penyaev wrote:
The last patch targets the contention problem in ep_poll_callback(), which can be very well reproduced by generating events (write to pipe or eventfd)
from many threads, while consumer thread does polling.

The following are some microbenchmark results based on the test [1] which starts threads which generate N events each. The test ends when all events
are successfully fetched by the poller thread:

 spinlock
 ========

 threads  events/ms  run-time ms
       8       6402        12495
      16       7045        22709
      32       7395        43268

 rwlock + xchg
 =============

 threads  events/ms  run-time ms
       8      10038         7969
      16      12178        13138
      32      13223        24199


According to the results bandwidth of delivered events is significantly
increased, thus execution time is reduced.

This series is based on linux-next/akpm and differs from RFC in that
additional cleanup patches and explicit comments have been added.

[1] https://github.com/rouming/test-tools/blob/master/stress-epoll.c

Care to "port" this to 'perf bench epoll', in linux-next? I've been
trying to unify into perf bench the whole epoll performance testcases
kernel developers can use when making changes and it would be useful.

Yes, good idea.  But frankly I do not want to bloat epoll-wait.c with
my multi-writers-single-reader test case, because soon epoll-wait.c
will become unmaintainable with all possible loads and set of
different options.

Can we have a single, small and separate source for each epoll load?
Easy to fix, easy to maintain, debug/hack.

I ran these patches on the 'wait' workload which is a epoll_wait(2)
stresser. On a 40-core IvyBridge it shows good performance
improvements for increasing number of file descriptors each of the 40
threads deals with:

64   fds: +20%
512  fds: +30%
1024 fds: +50%

(Yes these are pretty raw measurements ops/sec). Unlike your
benchmark, though, there is only single writer thread, and therefore
is less ideal to measure optimizations when IO becomes available.
Hence it would be nice to also have this.

That's weird. One writer thread does not content with anybody, only with
consumers, so should not be any big difference.

--
Roman




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux