From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 14 15:00:42 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8926E1065672; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:00:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kennaway-macbookpro.config (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5ED58FC13; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:00:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4A351099.3020407@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:00:41 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Attilio Rao References: <3bbf2fe10906081342i6ef418e0n75e22d0b9e2543b3@mail.gmail.com> <4A34F4B7.5050904@FreeBSD.org> <3bbf2fe10906140723y2a99eb8an3488796ac6604134@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10906140723y2a99eb8an3488796ac6604134@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Adaptive spinning for lockmgr X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:00:43 -0000 Attilio Rao wrote: > 2009/6/14 Kris Kennaway : >> Attilio Rao wrote: >>> This patch enables adaptive spinning for lockmgr: >>> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/adaptive_lockmgr.diff >>> >>> and it should presumably improve performance on disks/vfs/buffer cache >>> based benchmarks, so, if you want to try out and report any benchmarks >>> result, I'd love to see it. >>> Please note that there are some parameters to tune: for example, you >>> would like to not enable adaptive spinning to default while you just >>> want that for a class of locks (and in that case you want to apply the >>> reversed logic for what is living now) or you want to use different >>> values for retries and loops. Interested developers can refer to such >>> 3 variables. >>> Peter Holm alredy tested that patch for about 24hours without any >>> regression to report. >>> >>> Also note that the patch is not 100% yet as long as it needs UPDATES >>> and manpages updates, but they will be added just in time before to >>> commit. >>> The modify is all there. >> I have a vague memory that we had tested a version of this in the past and >> found that it caused a performance loss in common cases? Many lockmgr >> callers are not amenable to adaptive spinning because they have to wait on >> slow I/O. Testing only with e.g. md backing might give results that are >> non-representative. > > I don't think I ever implemented adaptive spinning in lockmgr so if > somebody else did I don't know. Said that, probabilly the best > approach would be to disable it by default ad use a LK_ADAPTIVESPIN > flag on a per instance basis. > Such conditions, though, need to be explored a bit and I have no time > to dedicate to this right now. OK, I am mis-remembering then. Ideally it would be tested in several representative workloads to see where it helps. I can't promise whether I can do this though, for the same reason as you :( Kris