Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 1 Feb 2011 14:07:51 +0200
From:      Stefan Lambrev <stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com>
To:        Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
Cc:        freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Subject:   Re: Interrupt performance
Message-ID:  <8979148D-8F2E-49E3-86EE-41CE6F57CDA4@moneybookers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110201113724.GS18170@zxy.spb.ru>
References:  <20110128143355.GD18170@zxy.spb.ru> <22E77EED-6455-4164-9115-BBD359EC8CA6@moneybookers.com> <20110128161035.GF18170@zxy.spb.ru> <CDBFAB7F-1EBC-4B3A-B2F5-6162DD58A93D@moneybookers.com> <4D42F87C.7020909@freebsd.org> <20110128172516.GG18170@zxy.spb.ru> <20110129070205.Q7034@besplex.bde.org> <20110201113724.GS18170@zxy.spb.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

On Feb 1, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 07:52:11AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
>=20
>>>> there are profiling tools that you may decide to run.
>>>=20
>>> What tools I can use on amd64?
>>>=20
>>> I boot kernel configured with 'config -p'.
>>> Most time in spinlock_exit and acpi_cpu_c1.
>>=20
>> Normal profiling works poorly (I see you found my old mail about high
>> resolution profiling).  Linux might be misreporting the overhead for
>> exactly the same reasons that normal profiling works poorly:
>> - the profiling clock frequency of ~1 KHz was adequate for 5 MHz =
machines
>>   in 1998, but is now too slow.  Statistics clocks are even slower =
(128
>>   Hz in FreeBSD, and possibly 100 Hz (?) jiffies in Linux).
>> - the statistics clock might be too synchronized with other =
interrupts.
>>   The above spinlock_exit and acpi_cpu_c1 times indicate that the
>>   statistics clock almost always fires on exit from another spinlock
>>   and/or inside ACPI, for waking up from idle for the latter.  Seeing
>>   lots of exits from spinlocks may indicated that spinlocks are being
>>   used too much.
>> But FreeBSD will report interrupt times and system for =
non-fast-interrupts
>> to an accuracy of about 1 microsecond, since it doesn't use the
>> statistics clock much for this.  OTOH, for fast interrupts it is =
typical
>> behaviour in FreeBSD and Linux to not see them at all from the =
statistics
>> clock interrupt, since they mask all interrupts so they mask the
>> statistics clock interrupt in particular.  In FreeBSD, lots of time
>> apparently spent in spinlock_exit is a typical result of this, or at
>> least similar things, since spinlock_enter masks all interrupts =
(except
>> in my version of course).  Linux doesn't have fast interrupts in the
>> same way that FreeBSD does, but at least in old versions almost all =
of
>> its interrupts masked other interrupts a lot.
>=20
> I do some more test and build kernel with KTR.
> Now I don't think that inetrrupt overhead on FreeBSD weight: I try
> polling and don't see any difference.
>=20
> I see many reported by netperf send errors. I found this
> http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1Aice9-0002by-00.
>=20
> After insert into src/nettest_bsd.c usleep(1000) if ENOBUF I see 53%
> idle and ./loop 2000000000 "Elapsed 15188006 us" -- this near to linux
> (Elapsed 14107670 us).
>=20
> 10% of difference may be by more weight network stack (only 32104
> ticks from 126136 in interrupt handler and task switching, and 94032
> -- UDP processing in network stack and passing datagram to driver).
> May be weight SOCKBUF_LOCK/SOCKBUF_UNLOCK and/or
> INP_INFO_RUNLOCK/INP_RUNLOCK.

Try to run with the same network buffers on FreeBSD and Linux.
I think, the default values in freebsd are much, much lower.
Also in the past ENOBUF was not handled properly in linux.

http://wiki.freebsd.org/AvoidingLinuxisms - Do not rely on =
Linux-specific socket behaviour. In particular, default socket buffer =
sizes are different (call setsockopt() with SO_SNDBUF and SO_RCVBUF), =
and while Linux's send() blocks when the socket buffer is full, =
FreeBSD's will fail and set ENOBUFS in errno.


--
Best Wishes,
Stefan Lambrev
ICQ# 24134177








Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8979148D-8F2E-49E3-86EE-41CE6F57CDA4>