On Thu, 06 May 2021 08:50:42 +0100,
He Ying <heying24@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Marc,Can you share more details on what regression you have observed?
We have faced a performance regression for handling ipis since this
commit. I think it's the same issue reported by Vincent.
What's the workload, the system, the performance drop?
I found you pointed out the possible two causes:It turned out to be a red herring. We don't reschedule more often, but
(1) irq_enter/exit on the rescheduling IPI means we reschedule much
more often.
we instead suffer from the overhead of irq_enter()/irq_exit().
However, this only matters for silly benchmarks, and no real-life
workload showed any significant regression. Have you identified such
realistic workload?
OK.
(2) irq_domain lookups add some overhead.While this is also a potential source of overhead, it turned out not
to be the case.
But I don't see any following patches in mainline. So, are you stillSee [1]. However, there is probably better things to do than this
working on this issue? Looking forward to your reply.
low-level specialisation of IPIs, and Thomas outlined what needs to be
done (see v1 of the patch series).
Thanks,
M.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201124141449.572446-1-maz@xxxxxxxxxx/