linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: JonasZhou-oc <JonasZhou-oc@zhaoxin.com>
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	CobeChen@zhaoxin.com, LouisQi@zhaoxin.com, JonasZhou@zhaoxin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/address_space: move i_mmap_rwsem to mitigate a false sharing with i_mmap.
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:03:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zb0EV8rTpfJVNAJA@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240202093407.12536-1-JonasZhou-oc@zhaoxin.com>

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 05:34:07PM +0800, JonasZhou-oc wrote:
> In the struct address_space, there is a 32-byte gap between i_mmap
> and i_mmap_rwsem. Due to the alignment of struct address_space
> variables to 8 bytes, in certain situations, i_mmap and
> i_mmap_rwsem may end up in the same CACHE line.
> 
> While running Unixbench/execl, we observe high false sharing issues
> when accessing i_mmap against i_mmap_rwsem. We move i_mmap_rwsem
> after i_private_list, ensuring a 64-byte gap between i_mmap and
> i_mmap_rwsem.

I'm confused.  i_mmap_rwsem protects i_mmap.  Usually you want the lock
and the thing it's protecting in the same cacheline.  Why is that not
the case here?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-02 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-02  9:34 [PATCH] fs/address_space: move i_mmap_rwsem to mitigate a false sharing with i_mmap JonasZhou-oc
2024-02-02 10:18 ` Christian Brauner
2024-02-02 15:03 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2024-02-02 19:32   ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-05  3:22     ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-05 23:28       ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-06 21:35         ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-06 23:33           ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-05  6:22     ` JonasZhou
2024-02-05 23:08       ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-06 13:06         ` Christian Brauner
2024-02-05 23:15       ` Dave Chinner
2024-03-06  6:16         ` JonasZhou
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-02-02  8:33 JonasZhou-oc
2024-02-02 16:20 ` Al Viro
2024-02-05 11:56 ` Christian Brauner

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=Zb0EV8rTpfJVNAJA@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=CobeChen@zhaoxin.com \
    --cc=JonasZhou-oc@zhaoxin.com \
    --cc=JonasZhou@zhaoxin.com \
    --cc=LouisQi@zhaoxin.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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).