From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman•id.au>
To: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux•ibm.com>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux•ibm.com>
Cc: tyreld@linux•ibm.com, cheloha@linux•ibm.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/pseries: explicitly reschedule during drmem_lmb list traversal
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:57:38 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lfj16cql.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878sf31m8k.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux•ibm.com> writes:
> Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux•ibm.com> writes:
>> Le 28/07/2020 à 19:37, Nathan Lynch a écrit :
>>> The drmem lmb list can have hundreds of thousands of entries, and
>>> unfortunately lookups take the form of linear searches. As long as
>>> this is the case, traversals have the potential to monopolize the CPU
>>> and provoke lockup reports, workqueue stalls, and the like unless
>>> they explicitly yield.
>>>
>>> Rather than placing cond_resched() calls within various
>>> for_each_drmem_lmb() loop blocks in the code, put it in the iteration
>>> expression of the loop macro itself so users can't omit it.
>>
>> Is that not too much to call cond_resched() on every LMB?
>>
>> Could that be less frequent, every 10, or 100, I don't really know ?
>
> Everything done within for_each_drmem_lmb is relatively heavyweight
> already. E.g. calling dlpar_remove_lmb()/dlpar_add_lmb() can take dozens
> of milliseconds. I don't think cond_resched() is an expensive check in
> this context.
Hmm, mostly.
But there are quite a few cases like drmem_update_dt_v1():
for_each_drmem_lmb(lmb) {
dr_cell->base_addr = cpu_to_be64(lmb->base_addr);
dr_cell->drc_index = cpu_to_be32(lmb->drc_index);
dr_cell->aa_index = cpu_to_be32(lmb->aa_index);
dr_cell->flags = cpu_to_be32(drmem_lmb_flags(lmb));
dr_cell++;
}
Which will compile to a pretty tight loop at the moment.
Or drmem_update_dt_v2() which has two loops over all lmbs.
And although the actual TIF check is cheap the function call to do it is
not free.
So I worry this is going to make some of those long loops take even longer.
At the same time I don't see an easy way to batch the calls to
cond_resched() without more intrusive changes.
cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-30 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-28 17:37 [PATCH] powerpc/pseries: explicitly reschedule during drmem_lmb list traversal Nathan Lynch
2020-07-28 17:46 ` Laurent Dufour
2020-07-28 19:19 ` Nathan Lynch
2020-07-30 0:57 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2020-07-30 15:01 ` Nathan Lynch
2020-07-31 13:16 ` Michael Ellerman
2020-07-31 13:52 ` Nathan Lynch
2020-08-02 12:42 ` Michael Ellerman
2020-08-10 20:03 ` Nathan Lynch
2020-08-12 1:32 ` Nathan Lynch
2020-09-09 13:27 ` Michael Ellerman
2020-09-10 7:37 ` Michael Ellerman
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=87lfj16cql.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au \
--to=mpe@ellerman$(echo .)id.au \
--cc=cheloha@linux$(echo .)ibm.com \
--cc=ldufour@linux$(echo .)ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
--cc=nathanl@linux$(echo .)ibm.com \
--cc=tyreld@linux$(echo .)ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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