linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@gmail.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@windriver.com>,
	Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
	Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched: implement the exclusive wait queue as a LIFO queue
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:42:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <y2r412e6f7f1004280642n49b8d6f2vcd08774531cb59da@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100428132135.GA22268@shareable.org>

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> wrote:
> Changli Gao wrote:
>>
>> fs/eventpoll.c: 1443.
>>                 wait.flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
>>                 __add_wait_queue(&ep->wq, &wait);
>
> The same thing about assumptions applies here.  The userspace process
> may be waiting for an epoll condition to get access to a resource,
> rather than being a worker thread interchangeable with others.

Oh, the lines above are the current ones. So the assumptions applies
and works here.

>
> For example, userspace might be using a pipe as a signal-safe lock, or
> signal-safe multi-token semaphore, and epoll to wait for that pipe.
>
> WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE means there is no point waking all tasks, to avoid a
> pointless thundering herd.  It doesn't mean unfairness is ok.

The users should not make any assumption about the waking up sequence,
neither LIFO nor FIFO.

>
> The LIFO idea _might_ make sense for interchangeable worker-thread
> situations - including userspace.  It would make sense for pipe
> waiters, socket waiters (especially accept), etc.

Yea, and my following patches are for socket waiters.

>
> Do you have any measurements which showing the LIFO mode performing
> better than FIFO, and by how much?
>

I didn't do any test yet. But some work done by LSE project years ago
showed that it is better.

http://lse.sourceforge.net/io/aionotes.txt

" Also in view of
better cache utilization the wake queue mechanism is LIFO by default.
(A new exclusive LIFO wakeup option has been introduced for this purpose)"

-- 
Regards,
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@gmail.com)

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-28 13:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-28  5:03 [RFC] sched: implement the exclusive wait queue as a LIFO queue Changli Gao
2010-04-28  6:22 ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28  8:05   ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28  7:47 ` Xiaotian Feng
2010-04-28  7:52   ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28  8:15     ` Yong Zhang
2010-04-28  8:23       ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28  9:25         ` Johannes Weiner
2010-04-28  9:29       ` David Howells
2010-04-28 11:17         ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28 13:21           ` Jamie Lokier
2010-04-28 13:42             ` Changli Gao [this message]
2010-04-28 15:25               ` Jamie Lokier
2010-04-28 15:49                 ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28 18:57           ` Davide Libenzi
2010-04-28 13:21         ` David Howells
2010-04-28  9:32 ` David Howells
2010-04-28 13:56   ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28 14:06   ` David Howells
2010-04-28 14:53     ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28 15:00     ` David Howells
2010-04-28 15:33       ` Changli Gao
2010-04-28  9:34 ` David Howells
2010-04-28 13:47   ` Changli Gao

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=y2r412e6f7f1004280642n49b8d6f2vcd08774531cb59da@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=xiaosuo@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=jamie@shareable.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rolandd@cisco.com \
    --cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tiwai@suse.de \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=xtfeng@gmail.com \
    --cc=yong.zhang@windriver.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).