From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu: preemptless __per_cpu_counter_add
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:20:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110427102034.GE31015@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1303883009.3981.316.camel@sli10-conroe>
Hello, Shaohua.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 01:43:29PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > That would be a pathelogical case but, even then, after the change the
> > number becomes much higher as it becomes a function of batch *
> > num_updaters, right?
>
> I don't understand the difference between batch * num_updaters and batch
> * num_cpus except preempt. So the only problem here is _add should have
> preempt disabled? I agree preempt can make deviation worse.
> except the preempt issue, are there other concerns against the atomic
> convert? in the preempt disabled case, before/after the atomic convert
> the deviation is the same (batch*num_cpus)
Yes, with preemption disabled, I think the patheological worst case
wouldn't be too different.
> > I don't really worry about _sum performance. It's a quite slow path
> > and most of the cost is from causing cacheline bounces anyway. That
> > said, I don't see how the above would help the deviation problem.
> > Let's say an updater reset per cpu counter but got preempted before
> > updating the global counter. What differences does it make to check
> > fbc->counter before & after like above?
>
> yes, this is a problem. Again I don't mind to disable preempt in _add.
Okay, this communication failure isn't my fault. Please re-read what
I wrote before, my concern wasn't primarily about pathological worst
case - if that many concurrent updates are happening && the counter
needs to be accurate, it can't even use atomic counter. It should be
doing full exclusion around the counter and the associated operation
_together_.
I'm worried about sporadic erratic behavior happening regardless of
update frequency and preemption would contribute but isn't necessary
for that to happen.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-27 10:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-13 14:45 percpu: preemptless __per_cpu_counter_add Christoph Lameter
2011-04-13 16:49 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-13 18:56 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-13 20:22 ` [PATCH] " Christoph Lameter
2011-04-13 21:50 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-13 22:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-13 22:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-13 23:55 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-14 2:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-14 2:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-14 21:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-14 21:15 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-15 17:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-15 18:27 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-15 19:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-15 23:52 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-18 14:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-21 14:43 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-21 14:58 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-21 17:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-21 18:01 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-21 18:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-21 18:37 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-21 18:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-21 19:08 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-22 2:33 ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-26 12:10 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-26 19:02 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-04-27 10:28 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-27 5:43 ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-27 10:20 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-04-28 3:28 ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-28 10:09 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 14:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 14:23 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 14:30 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 14:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 14:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 14:44 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 14:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 14:56 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 15:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 15:12 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 15:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 15:31 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 15:40 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28 15:47 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 15:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-28 15:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-28 16:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 16:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-28 16:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-28 16:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-04-29 8:52 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-29 8:32 ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-29 8:19 ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-29 8:44 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-29 14:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-29 14:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-29 14:18 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-29 14:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-04-29 14:43 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-29 14:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-05-05 4:08 ` Shaohua Li
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=20110427102034.GE31015@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.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).