Subject: Re: Performance regression from switching lock to rw-sem for
 anon-vma tree
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, "Shi, Alex" <alex.shi@intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>,
        "Wilcox, Matthew R" <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130812185247.GA20451@gmail.com>
References: <20130629071245.GA5084@gmail.com>
	 <1372710497.22432.224.camel@schen9-DESK> <20130702064538.GB3143@gmail.com>
	 <1373997195.22432.297.camel@schen9-DESK> <20130723094513.GA24522@gmail.com>
	 <20130723095124.GW27075@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
	 <20130723095306.GA26174@gmail.com> <1375143209.22432.419.camel@schen9-DESK>
	 <1375833325.2134.36.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
	 <1375836988.22432.435.camel@schen9-DESK> <20130812185247.GA20451@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 13:10:50 -0700
Message-ID: <1376338250.22432.440.camel@schen9-DESK>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2346
Lines: 53

On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 20:52 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 16:55 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > 
> > > I got good numbers, recovering the performance drop I noticed with the
> > > i_mmap_mutex to rwsem patches.
> > 
> > That's good.  I remembered that the earlier version of the patch not 
> > only recovered the performance drop, but also provide some boost when 
> > you switch from i_mmap_mutex to rwsem for aim7.  Do you see similar 
> > boost with this version?
> > 
> > >  Looking forward to a more upstreamable
> > > patchset that deals with this work, including the previous patches.
> > > 
> > > One thing that's bugging me about this series though is the huge amount
> > > of duplicated code being introduced to rwsems from mutexes. We can share
> > > common functionality such as mcs locking (perhaps in a new file under
> > > lib/), can_spin_on_owner() and owner_running(), perhaps moving those
> > > functions into sheduler code, were AFAIK they were originally.
> > 
> > I think that MCS locking is worth breaking out as its
> > own library.  After we've done that, the rest of
> > the duplication are minimal. It is easier
> > to keep them separate as there are some rwsem 
> > specific logic that may require tweaking
> > to can_spin_on_owner and owner_running.  
> 
> That's what I would strongly suggest to be the approach of these patches: 
> first the MCS locking factoring out, then changes in rwsem behavior.
> 
> I'd suggest the librarization should be done using inlines or so, so that 
> we don't touch the current (pretty good) mutex.o code generation. I.e. 
> code library only on the source code level.
> 
> Done that way we could also apply the librarization first, without having 
> to worry about performance aspects. Having the code shared will also make 
> sure that an improvement to the mutex slowpaths automatically carries over 
> into rwems and vice versa.

Ingo and Davidlohr,

Thanks for your feedbacks.  I'll spin off a set of new patches to
incorporate your suggestions later.

Tim

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/