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:   Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:09:39 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To:     Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@amd.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        David Windsor <dwindsor@gmail.com>,
        Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@intel.com>,
        Yuyang Du <duyuyang@gmail.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>, rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 7/7] x86,rcu: use percpu rcu_preempt_depth
Message-ID: <20191104120939.5e4hdcoat2v4jxov@linutronix.de>
References: <20191102124559.1135-1-laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
 <20191102124559.1135-8-laijs@linux.alibaba.com>
 <20191104092519.nukaz5qmgiskzafi@linutronix.de>
 <4878ccfd-7a4e-4f84-9bc3-1d477e077587@linux.alibaba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4878ccfd-7a4e-4f84-9bc3-1d477e077587@linux.alibaba.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-11-04 19:41:20 [+0800], Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> > Is there a benchmark saying how much we gain from this?
> 
> Hello
> 
> Maybe I can write a tight loop for testing, but I don't
> think anyone will be interesting in it.
> 
> I'm also trying to find some good real tests. I need
> some suggestions here.

There is rcutorture but I don't know how much of performance test this
is, Paul would know.

A micro benchmark is one thing. Any visible changes in userland to
workloads like building a kernel or hackbench? 

I don't argue that incrementing a per-CPU variable is more efficient
than reading a per-CPU variable, adding an offset and then incrementing
it. I was just curious to see if there are any numbers on it.

> > > No function call when using rcu_read_[un]lock().
> > > Single instruction for rcu_read_lock().
> > > 2 instructions for fast path of rcu_read_unlock().
> > 
> > I think these were not inlined due to the header requirements.
> 
> objdump -D -S kernel/workqueue.o shows (selected fractions):

That was not what I meant. To inline current rcu_read_lock() would mean
to include definition for struct task_struct (and everything down the
road) in the rcu headers which isn't working.

> Best regards
> Lai

Sebastian