Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 15:12:23 -0600
From: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, raz@scalemp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, efault@gmx.de, cpw@sgi.com,
        travis@sgi.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [BUG] soft lockup while booting machine with more than 700
	cores
Message-ID: <20110210211223.GB10757@sgi.com>
References: <1297236453.2756.9.camel@raz.scalemp.com> <20110210123937.GD26094@elte.hu> <20110210205648.GA10341@sgi.com> <20110210.130325.112603217.davem@davemloft.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110210.130325.112603217.davem@davemloft.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1725
Lines: 36

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 01:03:25PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 14:56:48 -0600
> 
> > We also noticed that the rebalance_domains() code references many per-cpu
> > run queue structures. All of the structures have identical offsets relative
> > to the size of a cache leaf. The result is that all index into the same lines in the
> > L3 caches. That causes many evictions. We tried an experimental to
> > stride the run queues at 128 byte offsets. That helped in some cases but the
> > results were mixed.  We are still experimenting with the patch.
> 
> I think chasing after cache alignment issues misses the point entirely.
> 
> The core issue is that rebalance_domains() is insanely expensive, by
> design.  It's complexity is N factorial for the idle non-HZ cpu that is
> selected to balance every single domain.
> 
> A statistic datastructure that is approximately 128 bytes in size is
> repopulated N! times each time this global rebalance thing runs.
> 
> I've been seeing rebalance_domains() in my perf top output on 128 cpu
> machines for several years now.  Even on an otherwise idle machine,
> the system churns in thus code path endlessly.

Completely agree! Idle rebalancing is also a big problem. We've seen
significant improvements on large systems in network thruput by
disabling IDLE load balancing for the higher (2 & 3) scheduling domains.

This is not a real fix but points to a problem.

--- jack
--
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/