From: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
To: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] eventpoll: Move a kmem_cache_alloc and kmem_cache_free
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:45:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5240622A.5010305@akamai.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130922204137.GA1612@dcvr.yhbt.net>
On 09/22/2013 04:41 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
> Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> wrote:
>> epoll: reduce usage of global 'epmutex' lock
>>
>> Epoll file descriptors that are 1 link from a wakeup source and
>> are not nested within other epoll descriptors, or pointing to
>> other epoll descriptors, don't need to check for loop creation or
>> the creation of wakeup storms. Because of this we can avoid taking
>> the global 'epmutex' in these cases. This state for the epoll file
>> descriptor is marked as 'EVENTPOLL_BASIC'. Once the epoll file
>> descriptor is attached to another epoll file descriptor it is
>> labeled as 'EVENTPOLL_COMPLEX', and full loop checking and wakeup
>> storm creation are checked using the the global 'epmutex'. It does
>> not transition back. Hopefully, this is a common usecase...
>
> Cool. I was thinking about doing the same thing down the line (for
> EPOLL_CTL_ADD, too)
>
>> @@ -166,6 +167,14 @@ struct epitem {
>>
>> /* The structure that describe the interested events and the source fd */
>> struct epoll_event event;
>> +
>> + /* TODO: really necessary? */
>> + int on_list;
>
> There's some things we can overload to avoid increasing epitem size
> (.ep, .ffd.fd, ...), so on_list should be unnecessary.
Even with 'on_list' the size of 'epitem' stayed at 128 bytes. Not sure if
there are certain compile options though that can move it over that you
are concerned about...so I think that change is ok.
The biggest hack here was using 'struct rb_node' instead of a proper
'struct rcu_head', so as not to increase the size of epitem. I think this
is safe and I've added build time checks to ensure that 'struct rb_node'
is never smaller than 'struct rcu_head'. But its rather hacky. I will
probably break this change out separately when I re-post so it can be
reviewed independently...
Thanks,
-Jason
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-23 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-13 15:54 [RFC] eventpoll: Move a kmem_cache_alloc and kmem_cache_free Nathan Zimmer
2013-09-18 19:09 ` Jason Baron
2013-09-19 16:37 ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-09-23 15:17 ` Jason Baron
2013-09-23 16:47 ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-09-24 19:30 ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-09-22 20:41 ` Eric Wong
2013-09-23 15:45 ` Jason Baron [this message]
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=5240622A.5010305@akamai.com \
--to=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=normalperson@yhbt.net \
--cc=nzimmer@sgi.com \
--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).