Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 15 May 2018 08:21:20 +1000
From:   Nicholas Piggin <nicholas.piggin@gmail.com>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
        jiangshanlai@gmail.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
        josh@joshtriplett.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
        fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, joel.opensrc@gmail.com,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, npiggin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/21] Contention reduction for v4.18
Message-ID: <20180515082120.1dbc32b5@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180514160907.GX26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20180423030258.GA23370@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <20180514164233.7c7bff00@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
        <20180514160907.GX26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 14 May 2018 09:09:07 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 04:42:33PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 20:02:58 -0700
> > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > Hello!
> > > 
> > > This series reduces lock contention on the root rcu_node
> > > structure, and is also the first precursor to TBD changes to
> > > consolidate the three RCU flavors (RCU-bh, RCU-preempt, and
> > > RCU-sched) into one.  
> > 
> > Hi Paul,
> > 
> > I've been running your rcu/dev branch and haven't noticed any
> > problems yet. The irqsoff latency improvement is a little hard to
> > measure because the scheduler, but I've tried turning balancing
> > parameters right down and I'm yet to see any sign of RCU in traces
> > (down to about 100us on a 176 CPU machine), so that's great.  
> 
> Good to hear!!!

Yep, as in, various other latencies are down to 100us, and still
no sign of RCU, so RCU must be sitting somewhere below that.


> > (Not that RCU was ever the worst contributor to latency as I said,
> > just that I noticed those couple of traces where it showed up.)
> > 
> > Thanks very much for the fast response, sorry I've taken a while to
> > test.  
> 
> Would you be willing to give me a Tested-by on that series of patches?

Yes of course, for your rcu/dev series

Tested-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>

Let me know if you make any other changes you'd like me to test before
merge.

Thanks,
Nick