Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760967AbZCRV5X (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:57:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759945AbZCRVtY (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:49:24 -0400 Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:60280 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758444AbZCRVtV (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:49:21 -0400 Message-ID: <49C16C5D.5090306@us.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:49:17 -0700 From: Vernon Mauery User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller CC: andi@firstfloor.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock References: <87prge1rhu.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20090318.140340.55290859.davem@davemloft.net> <49C16349.9030503@us.ibm.com> <20090318.143844.173112261.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20090318.143844.173112261.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1861 Lines: 41 David Miller wrote: > From: Vernon Mauery > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:10:33 -0700 > >> David Miller wrote: >>> From: Andi Kleen >>> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 21:54:37 +0100 >>> >>>> But then again I'm not sure it's worth it if the problem only >>>> happens in out of tree RT. >>> The list of problems that only show up with the RT kernel seems to be >>> constantly increasing, but honestly is very surprising to me. >>> I don't understand why we even need to be concerned about this stuff >>> upstream, to be honest. >>> Please reproduce this in the vanilla kernel, then get back to us. >> Huh? The numbers that I posted *were* from the vanilla kernel. I ran >> the 2.6.29-rc8 kernel with lock_stat enabled. The lock contention >> happens on the same lock in both vanilla and -rt, it just happens >> to be more pronounced in the -rt kernel because of the double context >> switches that the sleeping spinlock/rt-mutexes introduce. > > And the double context switches are probably also why less > natural batching and locality are achieved in the RT kernel. > > Isn't that true? Yes, the double context switches surely hurt the temporal and spatial locality of the vanilla codepath, but it also induces a longer penalty for blocking on a lock -- instead of a nanoseconds or a few microseconds, the task gets delayed for tens of microseconds. So really, the -rt kernel has more to fix than the vanilla kernel in this case, but any improvement in the lock contention in the vanilla case would be magnified and would cause dramatic improvements in the -rt kernel. --Vernon -- 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/