Received: by 2002:a05:6902:102b:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x11csp496085ybt; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:43:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdu3kFpnRlNbG1Ug+/BKIaTQZcMQVH246uOhUpsuLZcrXwgW3oc2vqKa/jId9dCTDgiK3m X-Received: by 2002:a50:ce45:: with SMTP id k5mr2969250edj.80.1593171827773; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:43:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1593171827; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=lYy7pFlM2Ts0M+bWlTtA7ACTXOZ1i1hG5Y95n3i4lIqbgo5bSzMDJSBhTaFYZcLHNW PT9zTP3RaEOcH/ZeC9yvJEOznjuOM2XE8HV8ZiotF3aaiUCalzSluDnTvL7fj016HIwl EwNe0MvGv7I71Bf5OigjAxowSCVLsUJurOkAluWBhjmxaqrTHXCQA9QCanaHLbxOaE7U YPtnpCIN+AOi6wgVfOAvqBEZVeP4t8Eq9KdO2oKHHoa3Tn725wM9vURRZm2YOwCeeYBV FkfRSYIAzjEu+6EwUNYZgiTE/u9BejxewM0Xh+xhzHsUN8NmpCyTn2CAYOaCCjPefPqi Xqtg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=oyzLLBTOczPEm9ft+t5NwMGuHub1d8Dj3LLNBNmCh04=; b=GSd41XFnvtMsUDrPiD3SSnLMCwzYXq1NkGMk6nXygpOo+GsB92dSdptlRlADjaPekP Tv3CRnAVEQZB/0ktemNhwatz9Uc0fAibNGMeYogliEzdlanxHoY0C3xXdP5aXEcIAzC8 BodnhVFYtM1jAWvkBWpYo3u4YGgDS4Y+hZSZrMPTdXe5FbQQi68h7JHYSXStpj7bCRnw WSGlE7jy2OEMNcTPbsGUQyeLErWX6F2wxM5uERnreNceo5Agym/FK3vZtIMd+REbKzr2 yCzJ9Md/kGIk+X2wC4Nja4qgVPP98zxMzz2rqTOJuZnBlbSnLhafLHi2kghBbFCGui8x 647Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id cm12si9632642edb.333.2020.06.26.04.43.23; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726576AbgFZKAx (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:00:53 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:60038 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725883AbgFZKAw (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 06:00:52 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0101FB; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 03:00:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.37.12.15] (unknown [10.37.12.15]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71E063F71E; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 03:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] sched: Optionally skip uclamp logic in fast path To: Qais Yousef Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Valentin Schneider , Juri Lelli , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Patrick Bellasi , Chris Redpath , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20200625154352.24767-1-qais.yousef@arm.com> From: Lukasz Luba Message-ID: <7aa76981-85f2-f73a-9bbb-d40b3eb38f6c@arm.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 11:00:46 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200625154352.24767-1-qais.yousef@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Qais, On 6/25/20 4:43 PM, Qais Yousef wrote: > This series attempts to address the report that uclamp logic could be expensive > sometimes and shows a regression in netperf UDP_STREAM under certain > conditions. > > The first patch is a fix for how struct uclamp_rq is initialized which is > required by the 2nd patch which contains the real 'fix'. > > Worth noting that the root cause of the overhead is believed to be system > specific or related to potential certain code/data layout issues, leading to > worse I/D $ performance. > > Different systems exhibited different behaviors and the regression did > disappear in certain kernel version while attempting to reporoduce. > > More info can be found here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200616110824.dgkkbyapn3io6wik@e107158-lin/ > > Having the static key seemed the best thing to do to ensure the effect of > uclamp is minimized for kernels that compile it in but don't have a userspace > that uses it, which will allow distros to distribute uclamp capable kernels by > default without having to compromise on performance for some systems that could > be affected. > > Changes in v4: > * Fix broken boosting of RT tasks when static key is disabled. > > Changes in v3: > * Avoid double negatives and rename the static key to uclamp_used > * Unconditionally enable the static key through any of the paths where > the user can modify the default uclamp value. > * Use C99 named struct initializer for struct uclamp_rq which is easier > to read than the memset(). > > Changes in v2: > * Add more info in the commit message about the result of perf diff to > demonstrate that the activate/deactivate_task pressure is reduced in > the fast path. > > * Fix sparse warning reported by the test robot. > > * Add an extra commit about using static_branch_likely() instead of > static_branc_unlikely(). > I've tried this v4 series with mmtest netperf-udp (30x each UDP size) - results are good (just double checking and making sure the tag indicating that v4 was tested can be applied). v5.7-rc7-base-noucl v5.7-rc7-ucl-tsk-nofix v5.7-rc7-ucl-tsk-grp-fix_v4 Hmean send-64 62.15 ( 0.00%) 59.65 * -4.02%* 65.86 * 5.97%* Hmean send-128 122.88 ( 0.00%) 119.37 * -2.85%* 131.75 * 7.22%* Hmean send-256 244.85 ( 0.00%) 234.26 * -4.32%* 259.33 * 5.92%* Hmean send-1024 919.24 ( 0.00%) 880.67 * -4.20%* 979.49 * 6.55%* Hmean send-2048 1689.45 ( 0.00%) 1647.54 * -2.48%* 1805.21 * 6.85%* Hmean send-3312 2542.36 ( 0.00%) 2485.23 * -2.25%* 2658.30 * 4.56%* Hmean send-4096 2935.69 ( 0.00%) 2861.09 * -2.54%* 3083.08 * 5.02%* Hmean send-8192 4800.35 ( 0.00%) 4680.09 * -2.51%* 4984.22 * 3.83%* Hmean send-16384 7473.66 ( 0.00%) 7349.60 * -1.66%* 7703.88 * 3.08%* Hmean recv-64 62.15 ( 0.00%) 59.65 * -4.03%* 65.85 * 5.96%* Hmean recv-128 122.88 ( 0.00%) 119.37 * -2.85%* 131.74 * 7.21%* Hmean recv-256 244.84 ( 0.00%) 234.26 * -4.32%* 259.33 * 5.92%* Hmean recv-1024 919.24 ( 0.00%) 880.67 * -4.20%* 979.46 * 6.55%* Hmean recv-2048 1689.44 ( 0.00%) 1647.54 * -2.48%* 1805.17 * 6.85%* Hmean recv-3312 2542.36 ( 0.00%) 2485.23 * -2.25%* 2657.67 * 4.54%* Hmean recv-4096 2935.69 ( 0.00%) 2861.09 * -2.54%* 3082.58 * 5.00%* Hmean recv-8192 4800.35 ( 0.00%) 4678.15 * -2.55%* 4982.49 * 3.79%* Hmean recv-16384 7473.63 ( 0.00%) 7349.52 * -1.66%* 7701.53 * 3.05%* You can add my: Tested-by: Lukasz Luba If anyone would like to see some other tests, please let me know, maybe I can setup something. Regards, Lukasz