RFC: Ideal Adaptive Spinning Conditions

From: Darren Hart
Date: Wed Mar 31 2010 - 19:21:59 EST


I'm looking at some adaptive spinning with futexes as a way to help reduce the dependence on sched_yield() to implement userspace spinlocks. Chris, I included you in the CC after reading your comments regarding sched_yield() at kernel summit and I thought you might be interested.

I have an experimental patchset that implements FUTEX_LOCK and FUTEX_LOCK_ADAPTIVE in the kernel and use something akin to mutex_spin_on_owner() for the first waiter to spin. What I'm finding is that adaptive spinning actually hurts my particular test case, so I was hoping to poll people for context regarding the existing adaptive spinning implementations in the kernel as to where we see benefit. Under which conditions does adaptive spinning help?

I presume locks with a short average hold time stand to gain the most as the longer the lock is held the more likely the spinner will expire its timeslice or that the scheduling gain becomes noise in the acquisition time. My test case simple calls "lock();unlock()" for a fixed number of iterations and reports the iterations per second at the end of the run. It can run with an arbitrary number of threads as well. I typically run with 256 threads for 10M iterations.

futex_lock: Result: 635 Kiter/s
futex_lock_adaptive: Result: 542 Kiter/s

I've limited the number of spinners to 1 but feel that perhaps this should be configurable as locks with very short hold times could benefit from up to NR_CPUS-1 spinners.

I'd really appreciate any data, just general insight, you may have acquired while implementing adaptive spinning for rt-mutexes and mutexes. Open questions for me regarding conditions where adaptive spinning helps are:

o What type of lock hold times do we expect to benefit?
o How much contention is a good match for adaptive spinning?
- this is related to the number of threads to run in the test
o How many spinners should be allowed?

I can share the kernel patches if people are interested, but they are really early, and I'm not sure they are of much value until I better understand the conditions where this is expected to be useful.

Thanks,

--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team
--
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/