From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] kernel/rcu: add kfree_rcu
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 13:22:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4960A9E8.3090309@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <496073AB.2030400@cn.fujitsu.com>
Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> I have not posted it. -:)
>
Could you post it?
Paul: What would break if we stop processing rcu entries in (cpu) order?
The head->func(head) in rcu_do_batch() is probably a nightmare for the
branch target predictor.
What about:
- shrinking struct rcu_head to just a pointer (let's start with the goodie)
- Adding a register_rcu_callback() function.
It allocates the per-cpu storage for the rcu grace period lists.
Seperate lists for each registered callback - thus no need to copy the
callback target into each rcu_head structure.
It returns a pointer/handle to these lists.
- call_rcu gets that handle instead of the plain function pointer.
- rcu_do_batch enumerates all registered callbacks. Thus first all
callback_struct->func(head) calls for the first registered callback,
then the calls for the 2nd callback, etc.
Better for the icache, better for the branch predictor.
Paul: Do you have a test case that is suitable for benchmarking rcu?
Any workloads were rcu appears significantly in oprofile?
And: Do you know how many rcu entries are typically alive? How much
memory is used for the function pointers?
--
Manfred
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-04 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-02 11:25 [RFC, PATCH] kernel/rcu: add kfree_rcu Manfred Spraul
2009-01-02 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-03 14:59 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-03 23:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-04 5:50 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 19:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 2:48 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-05 4:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 22:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 7:15 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-04 5:39 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 7:07 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-04 8:30 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 12:22 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2009-01-04 20:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-12 17:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4960A9E8.3090309@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.