From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, <walken@google.com>,
<mingo@elte.hu>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:05:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130916160547.371b74f91511a42ac263449e@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1377872041-390-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fusionio.com>
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:14:01 -0400 Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> wrote:
> Btrfs uses an rwsem to control access to its extent tree. Threads will hold a
> read lock on this rwsem while they scan the extent tree, and if need_resched()
> they will drop the lock and schedule. The transaction commit needs to take a
> write lock for this rwsem for a very short period to switch out the commit
> roots. If there are a lot of threads doing this caching operation we can starve
> out the committers which slows everybody out. To address this we want to add
> this functionality to see if our rwsem has anybody waiting to take a write lock
> so we can drop it and schedule for a bit to allow the commit to continue.
> Thanks,
>
This sounds rather nasty and hacky. Rather then working around a
locking shortcoming in a caller it would be better to fix/enhance the
core locking code. What would such a change need to do?
Presently rwsem waiters are fifo-queued, are they not? So the commit
thread will eventually get that lock. Apparently that's not working
adequately for you but I don't fully understand what it is about these
dynamics which is causing observable problems.
> I've cc'ed people who seemed like they may be in charge/familiar with this code,
> hopefully I got the right people.
>
> include/linux/rwsem.h | 1 +
> lib/rwsem.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
This will break CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK=n?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-16 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-30 14:14 [PATCH] rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended Josef Bacik
2013-08-31 14:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-03 15:49 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-01 8:32 ` Michel Lespinasse
2013-09-02 17:18 ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-03 13:18 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-04 11:46 ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-04 12:13 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-03 15:47 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-04 12:11 ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-16 23:05 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-09-17 0:05 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-17 0:29 ` David Daney
2013-09-17 0:37 ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-17 1:08 ` David Daney
2013-09-17 1:11 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-17 1:22 ` Peter Hurley
2013-09-17 6:53 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20130916160547.371b74f91511a42ac263449e@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jbacik@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=walken@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).