Hi,
I ported lockmeter to PPC and ran a few dbench runs on a quad CPU F50 here.
These runs were made to never hit the disk. The full results can be found
here:
http://samba.org/~anton/ppc/lockmeter/2.4.3-pre3_hacked/
It was not surprising the BKL was one of the main offenders. Looking at the
stats ext2_get_block was the bad guy (UTIL is % of time lock was busy for,
WAIT is time spent waiting for lock):
SPINLOCKS HOLD WAIT
UTIL CON MEAN( MAX ) MEAN( MAX )( %CPU) TOTAL NAME
38.8% 41.0% 7.6us( 31ms) 15us( 18ms)( 7.7%) 1683368 kernel_flag
0.87% 9.1% 13ms( 31ms) 129us( 231us)(0.00%) 22 do_exit+0x120
2.6% 21.6% 45us(2103us) 79us( 18ms)(0.25%) 19240 ext2_delete_inode+0x34
0.32% 24.8% 1.2us( 46us) 14us( 992us)(0.25%) 92415 ext2_discard_prealloc+0x34
29.2% 50.9% 10us( 400us) 15us( 892us)( 5.4%) 957740 ext2_get_block+0x64
0.40% 32.8% 18us( 208us) 31us( 11ms)(0.06%) 7435 lookup_hash+0xb0
0.09% 17.3% 11us( 139us) 17us( 237us)(0.01%) 2560 notify_change+0x8c
0.01% 17.3% 34us( 138us) 912us( 11ms)(0.01%) 81 real_lookup+0x94
0.02% 39.5% 34us( 344us) 47us( 331us)(0.00%) 172 schedule+0x4fc
0.00% 15.4% 11us( 37us) 14us( 22us)(0.00%) 26 sys_ioctl+0x50
1.1% 28.7% 0.7us( 131us) 12us( 910us)( 1.5%) 559700 sys_lseek+0x90
0.56% 25.8% 48us( 245us) 12us( 162us)(0.01%) 3900 sys_rename+0x1fc
0.03% 25.0% 24us( 43us) 64us(1004us)(0.00%) 400 tty_read+0xd4
0.07% 24.1% 31us( 64us) 17us( 293us)(0.00%) 776 tty_write+0x234
2.0% 32.5% 35us( 267us) 13us( 504us)(0.06%) 19220 vfs_create+0xd0
0.29% 76.5% 437us( 533us) 25us( 456us)(0.00%) 221 vfs_mkdir+0xd0
0.05% 19.2% 65us( 285us) 460us(9017us)(0.02%) 240 vfs_rmdir+0x208
1.1% 23.2% 19us( 236us) 17us( 819us)(0.06%) 19220 vfs_unlink+0x188
It can be also seen that do_exit grabbed the BKL for way too long. Another
large waster of cpu time was the lru_list_lock:
SPINLOCKS HOLD WAIT
UTIL CON MEAN( MAX ) MEAN( MAX )( %CPU) TOTAL NAME
25.8% 27.0% 1.6us( 169us) 8.9us( 446us)( 9.5%) 5281025 lru_list_lock
0.07% 33.0% 2.9us( 34us) 11us( 293us)(0.02%) 8051 __bforget+0x20
1.7% 14.6% 0.3us( 44us) 5.2us( 265us)( 1.1%) 1870792 buffer_insert_inode_queue+0x24
7.3% 13.6% 1.9us( 169us) 5.5us( 278us)(0.70%) 1239163 getblk+0x28
0.00% 58.8% 1.0us( 4.5us) 13us( 142us)(0.00%) 221 invalidate_inode_buffers+0x20
10.0% 45.5% 1.7us( 134us) 10us( 446us)( 6.6%) 1920438 refile_buffer+0x20
6.7% 45.2% 9.2us( 149us) 14us( 330us)( 1.2%) 242360 try_to_free_buffers+0x44
I began smashing up lru_list_lock but found a few problems. With a name
like lru_list_lock, you would expect it to only synchronise operations to
lru_list[]. However I find things like:
int inode_has_buffers(struct inode *inode)
{
int ret;
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
ret = !list_empty(&inode->i_dirty_buffers);
spin_unlock(&lru_list_lock);
return ret;
}
It also looks to be protecting some of the items in the buffer_head struct.
Is the lru_list_lock spinlock usage documented anywhere?
Cheers,
Anton
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 23 2001 - 21:00:15 EST