Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock

From: Vernon Mauery
Date: Wed Mar 18 2009 - 17:07:51 EST


Andi Kleen wrote:
Vernon Mauery <vernux@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
So while this issue really hits -rt kernels hard, it has a real effect on
mainline kernels as well. The contention of the spinlocks is amplified
when they get turned into rt-mutexes, which causes a double context switch.

The new adaptive spin heuristics that have been discussed some time
ago didn't help? Unsurprisingly making locks a lot more expensive
has drawbacks as you discovered.

Yes. Well, while the adaptive spinlocks did great things for the
network throughput last time I tested them, they also didn't quite
give the determinism in other areas. It would be nice to be able to
target a handful of trouble locks with adaptive spinlocks.

Even so, though I saw dramatic throughput increases with adaptive
spinlocks, they would still be bound by this same lock contention
that I am seeing when the locks are true spinlocks.

&list->lock#3: 24517307 24643791 0.71 1286.62 56516392.42 34834296 44904018 0.60 164.79 31314786.02
-------------
&list->lock#3 15596927 [<ffffffff812474da>] dev_queue_xmit+0x2ea/0x468

The real "fix" would be probably to use a multi queue capable NIC
and a NIC driver that sets up multiple queues for TX (normally they
only do for RX). Then cores or a set of cores (often the number
of cores is larger than the number of NIC queues) could avoid this
problem. Disadvantage: more memory use.

Hmmm. So do either the netxen_nic or bnx2x drivers support multiple
queues? (that is the HW that I have access to right now). And do I
need to do anything to set them up?

But then again I'm not sure it's worth it if the problem only
happens in out of tree RT.

The effects of the high contention are not quite so pronounced in the
vanilla kernel, but I think we are still limited by this lock. In the
-rt kernel, it is obvious that the lock contention is causing lots of
trouble.

--Vernon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/