From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
lkp@01.org
Subject: [RFC] replace ->get_poll_head with a waitqueue pointer in struct file
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:20:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180628142059.10017-1-hch@lst.de> (raw)
Introducing the new poll methods showed up a regression in the
will-it-scale ltp tests. One reason for that is that indirect function
calls are very expensive now with the spectre mitigations. I'm waiting
for better numbers, but this series has shown a 5% improvements in the
ops per second so far, while for the get_poll_head addition we had
regressions of 3.7% or 8.8% depending on the measurement.
This series removes the get_poll_head method again and instead stores an
optional wait_queue_head pointer in struct file, on which the poll_mask
method can be used if it is set. The only complication is the networking
poll code which not only does some interesting gymnastics to get at the
wait queue pointer, but also has a mode to to hardware polling before
waiting for an even from poll or epoll. Because of that this series has
a few net prep patches that need careful review.
next reply other threads:[~2018-06-28 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-28 14:20 Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] net: remove sock_poll_busy_flag Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 2/6] net: remove bogus RCU annotations on socket.wq Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 3/6] net: don't detour through struct to find the poll head Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 4/6] net: remove busy polling from sock_get_poll_head Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 5/6] net: remove sock_poll_busy_loop Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 14:20 ` [PATCH 6/6] fs: replace f_ops->get_poll_head with a static ->f_poll_head pointer Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 16:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 18:17 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 19:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 20:28 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 20:37 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 21:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 21:30 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 21:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:20 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 22:49 ` Al Viro
2018-06-28 22:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-28 23:37 ` Al Viro
2018-06-29 0:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29 13:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-29 13:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-29 13:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20180628142059.10017-1-hch@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).