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;
Date:   Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:01:33 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To:     Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
Cc:     Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>, peterz@infradead.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] locking/percpu-rwsem: use this_cpu_{inc|dec}() for
 read_count
Message-ID: <20200917120132.GA5602@redhat.com>
References: <20200915140750.137881-1-houtao1@huawei.com>
 <20200915150610.GC2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200915153113.GA6881@redhat.com>
 <20200915155150.GD2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200915160344.GH35926@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <b885ce8e-4b0b-8321-c2cc-ee8f42de52d4@huawei.com>
 <ddd5d732-06da-f8f2-ba4a-686c58297e47@plexistor.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ddd5d732-06da-f8f2-ba4a-686c58297e47@plexistor.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On 09/17, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
> On 16/09/2020 15:32, Hou Tao wrote:
> <>
> >However the performance degradation is huge under aarch64 (4 sockets, 24 core per sockets): nearly 60% lost.
> >
> >v4.19.111
> >no writer, reader cn                               | 24        | 48        | 72        | 96
> >the rate of down_read/up_read per second           | 166129572 | 166064100 | 165963448 | 165203565
> >the rate of down_read/up_read per second (patched) |  63863506 |  63842132 |  63757267 |  63514920
> >
>
> I believe perhaps Peter Z's suggestion of an additional
> percpu_down_read_irqsafe() API and let only those in IRQ users pay the
> penalty.
>
> Peter Z wrote:
> >My leading alternative was adding: percpu_down_read_irqsafe() /
> >percpu_up_read_irqsafe(), which use local_irq_save() instead of
> >preempt_disable().

This means that __sb_start/end_write() and probably more users in fs/super.c
will have to use this API, not good.

IIUC, file_end_write() was never IRQ safe (at least if !CONFIG_SMP), even
before 8129ed2964 ("change sb_writers to use percpu_rw_semaphore"), but this
doesn't matter...

Perhaps we can change aio.c, io_uring.c and fs/overlayfs/file.c to avoid
file_end_write() in IRQ context, but I am not sure it's worth the trouble.

Oleg.