mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-12-06 02:24:14 +08:00
0912037fec
While optimizing task_bp_pinned()'s runtime complexity to O(1) on average helps reduce time spent in the critical section, we still suffer due to serializing everything via 'nr_bp_mutex'. Indeed, a profile shows that now contention is the biggest issue: 95.93% [kernel] [k] osq_lock 0.70% [kernel] [k] mutex_spin_on_owner 0.22% [kernel] [k] smp_cfm_core_cond 0.18% [kernel] [k] task_bp_pinned 0.18% [kernel] [k] rhashtable_jhash2 0.15% [kernel] [k] queued_spin_lock_slowpath when running the breakpoint benchmark with (system with 256 CPUs): | $> perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark: | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism | Total time: 0.207 [sec] | | 108.267188 usecs/op | 6929.100000 usecs/op/cpu The main concern for synchronizing the breakpoint constraints data is that a consistent snapshot of the per-CPU and per-task data is observed. The access pattern is as follows: 1. If the target is a task: the task's pinned breakpoints are counted, checked for space, and then appended to; only bp_cpuinfo::cpu_pinned is used to check for conflicts with CPU-only breakpoints; bp_cpuinfo::tsk_pinned are incremented/decremented, but otherwise unused. 2. If the target is a CPU: bp_cpuinfo::cpu_pinned are counted, along with bp_cpuinfo::tsk_pinned; after a successful check, cpu_pinned is incremented. No per-task breakpoints are checked. Since rhltable safely synchronizes insertions/deletions, we can allow concurrency as follows: 1. If the target is a task: independent tasks may update and check the constraints concurrently, but same-task target calls need to be serialized; since bp_cpuinfo::tsk_pinned is only updated, but not checked, these modifications can happen concurrently by switching tsk_pinned to atomic_t. 2. If the target is a CPU: access to the per-CPU constraints needs to be serialized with other CPU-target and task-target callers (to stabilize the bp_cpuinfo::tsk_pinned snapshot). We can allow the above concurrency by introducing a per-CPU constraints data reader-writer lock (bp_cpuinfo_sem), and per-task mutexes (reuses task_struct::perf_event_mutex): 1. If the target is a task: acquires perf_event_mutex, and acquires bp_cpuinfo_sem as a reader. The choice of percpu-rwsem minimizes contention in the presence of many read-lock but few write-lock acquisitions: we assume many orders of magnitude more task target breakpoints creations/destructions than CPU target breakpoints. 2. If the target is a CPU: acquires bp_cpuinfo_sem as a writer. With these changes, contention with thousands of tasks is reduced to the point where waiting on locking no longer dominates the profile: | $> perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark: | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism | Total time: 0.077 [sec] | | 40.201563 usecs/op | 2572.900000 usecs/op/cpu 21.54% [kernel] [k] task_bp_pinned 20.18% [kernel] [k] rhashtable_jhash2 6.81% [kernel] [k] toggle_bp_slot 5.47% [kernel] [k] queued_spin_lock_slowpath 3.75% [kernel] [k] smp_cfm_core_cond 3.48% [kernel] [k] bcmp On this particular setup that's a speedup of 2.7x. We're also getting closer to the theoretical ideal performance through optimizations in hw_breakpoint.c -- constraints accounting disabled: | perf bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 4 -p 64 -t 64 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark: | # Created/joined 30 threads with 4 breakpoints and 64 parallelism | Total time: 0.067 [sec] | | 35.286458 usecs/op | 2258.333333 usecs/op/cpu Which means the current implementation is ~12% slower than the theoretical ideal. For reference, performance without any breakpoints: | $> bench -r 30 breakpoint thread -b 0 -p 64 -t 64 | # Running 'breakpoint/thread' benchmark: | # Created/joined 30 threads with 0 breakpoints and 64 parallelism | Total time: 0.060 [sec] | | 31.365625 usecs/op | 2007.400000 usecs/op/cpu On a system with 256 CPUs, the theoretical ideal is only ~12% slower than no breakpoints at all; the current implementation is ~28% slower. Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> Acked-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220829124719.675715-12-elver@google.com |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
callchain.c | ||
core.c | ||
hw_breakpoint_test.c | ||
hw_breakpoint.c | ||
internal.h | ||
Makefile | ||
ring_buffer.c | ||
uprobes.c |