X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:references:to:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=s22d96rIXpR6dwEv
	mGRZB0xlW32vVyj1y9LVpL8HuINvkfLD5sGx5pW9foayvPVB8BzX77L+d/RnY6dq
	Oob/tKUVmqBbo6fgCGnWLKJ3WXSs7mLxvRPAt2cp55kzwAdKhnUbqFOnPORkDOtM
	0Qw9RqN7SE2Trqa+8tdLShhOVoo=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:references:to:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=pokwO5Eo8couXgQoEeCctj
	Lg6Uc=; b=rUt4+G1uL6BpGq6Ptudo+L6BOvMJrhWyu20CzPHf74X5BWqblQCMFK
	6kiDbwLDJLyWbhdd33Meh4yYXbk1DSgkx0HUNBvOyIP8T8oa510+6NFM0Fm9MGRV
	Iw0/K95JbrjRm24v/7w2lWItXet3EnaxxnaoqcC3KJo1MpZJd31gE=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: m0.truegem.net
Subject: Re: Cygwin multithreading performance
References: <CABPLASTtRK4mNxh0M_AnZgjJQ15kWPx+L=U=VCU3Wwi7jV_57A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <564E3017 DOT 90205 AT maxrnd DOT com> <CABPLASTLrH_udLuu2F-m5P6dkENW1Z4YHEudp4NG0-FGLJgPMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Mark Geisert <mark AT maxrnd DOT com>
Message-ID: <5650379B.4030405@maxrnd.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 01:21:31 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABPLASTLrH_udLuu2F-m5P6dkENW1Z4YHEudp4NG0-FGLJgPMg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Kacper Michajlow wrote:
> Thanks for reply. And sorry for being not specific enough before. 'git
> gc' is a driver which runs various git command to do cleanup in
> repository. Though I'm mostly concerned about the code I linked.
> Instead of 'git gc' it is better to test directly 'git repack -a -f'
> and possibly on repository where it takes some time.
> 'git://sourceware.org/git/newlib-cygwin.git' is good test case.
> Although with bigger repositories performance hit is bigger, this is
> good example to see what's going on.

I appreciate that more specific info on how you experience the issue.

> I'm well aware that forking on windows is problematic, but I
> explicitly interested in parallelized part of execution. I don't care
> about forks, while this slows things down too, they are not used in
> compression process which is parallelized over the all cpu threads.
> Each command is indeed forked, but I'm only interested about
> pack-objects part hence the code I linked.

OK, we're on the same page now :).

> $ strace --mask=debug+syscall+thread -o git.strace git repack -a -f
> Counting objects: 156690, done.
> Delta compression using up to 12 threads.
> Compressing objects: 100% (154730/154730), done.
> Writing objects: 100% (156690/156690), done.
> Total 156690 (delta 123449), reused 33146 (delta 0)
>
> $ grep "fork(" git.strace
>    559   53728 [main] git 24340 fork: 24368 = fork()
>    465   54022 [main] git 24368 fork: 0 = fork()
>
> Only two forks were created, while during compression only 25% cpu was
> used (on big repo like linux kernel it doesn't exceed 8%). With native
> git the same workload easily uses 95-100% cpu and therefor is a lot
> faster.

I was able to reproduce your issue using a cloned newlib-cygwin repo. 
On a 6-CPU machine I saw max 36% CPU utilization during the compression 
phase.  ProcessExplorer showed all 6 threads were getting CPU time (to 
varying degrees) and when suspended they were always trying to acquire a 
mutex.  I'd like to run some more straces and perhaps investigate with 
some other tools before saying more.  This may take a while.

What I've done so far is install the git-debuginfo and cygwin-debuginfo 
packages to that I can convert hex RIP addresses to line numbers.  I've 
run the testcase under gdb so I can interrupt at random times and poke 
around.  The straces from this testcase are ginormous so I hope I can 
figure out a better way to see why the compression threads aren't 
CPU-bound like they should be.  If you don't already know, 'strace 
--help' shows the available mask values.  The threads are each writing 
to disk, so I wonder if there's some unintentional serialization going 
on somewhere, but I don't know yet how I could verify that theory.

..mark


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple