From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Nikita@namesys.com, akpm@zip.com.au, george@mvista.com,
andrea@suse.de, rml@tech9.net, Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de,
mason@suse.com, kuib-kl@ljbc.wa.edu.au,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrea@suse.de
Subject: Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: [PATCH] Significant performace improvements on reiserfs systems
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 09:49:59 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010924094959.4b6725c0.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E15kPGJ-0008EU-00@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <15275.2374.92496.536594@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <E15kPGJ-0008EU-00@the-village.bc.nu>
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:18:31 +0100 (BST)
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > In Solaris, before spinning on a busy spin-lock, thread checks whether
> > spin-lock holder runs on the same processor. If so, thread goes to sleep
> > and holder wakes it up on spin-lock release. The same, I guess is going
>
>
> > for interrupts that are served as separate threads. This way, one can
> > re-schedule with spin-locks held.
>
> This is one of the things interrupt handling by threads gives you, but the
> performance cost is not nice. When you consider that ksoftirqd when it
> kicks in (currently far too often) takes up to 10% off gigabit ethernet
> performance, you can appreciate why we don't want to go that path.
I've been thinking about this: I know some people have been fiddling with making
do_softirq spin X times before kicking ksoftirqd, but how about the following?
Cheers,
Rusty.
--- linux-pmac/kernel/softirq.c Sun Sep 9 15:11:37 2001
+++ working-pmac-ksoftirq/kernel/softirq.c Mon Sep 24 09:44:07 2001
@@ -63,11 +63,12 @@
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
__u32 pending;
long flags;
- __u32 mask;
+ long start;
if (in_interrupt())
return;
+ start = jiffies;
local_irq_save(flags);
pending = softirq_pending(cpu);
@@ -75,32 +76,32 @@
if (pending) {
struct softirq_action *h;
- mask = ~pending;
local_bh_disable();
-restart:
- /* Reset the pending bitmask before enabling irqs */
- softirq_pending(cpu) = 0;
+ do {
+ /* Reset the pending bitmask before enabling irqs */
+ softirq_pending(cpu) = 0;
- local_irq_enable();
+ local_irq_enable();
- h = softirq_vec;
+ h = softirq_vec;
- do {
- if (pending & 1)
- h->action(h);
- h++;
- pending >>= 1;
- } while (pending);
-
- local_irq_disable();
-
- pending = softirq_pending(cpu);
- if (pending & mask) {
- mask &= ~pending;
- goto restart;
- }
+ do {
+ if (pending & 1)
+ h->action(h);
+ h++;
+ pending >>= 1;
+ } while (pending);
+
+ local_irq_disable();
+
+ pending = softirq_pending(cpu);
+
+ /* Don't spin here forever... */
+ } while (pending && start == jiffies);
__local_bh_enable();
+ /* If a timer tick went off, assume we're overloaded,
+ and kick in ksoftirqd */
if (pending)
wakeup_softirqd(cpu);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-23 23:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20010920170812.CCCACE641B@ns1.suse.com>
2001-09-20 17:19 ` [PATCH] Significant performace improvements on reiserfs systems Chris Mason
2001-09-20 17:39 ` Andrew Morton
2001-09-20 20:52 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 21:11 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109202112.f8KLCXG16849@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-20 22:24 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 22:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 22:56 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 23:15 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 23:41 ` Robert Love
2001-09-21 0:37 ` george anzinger
2001-09-21 1:20 ` Andrew Morton
2001-09-21 3:14 ` Robert Love
2001-09-21 9:32 ` [reiserfs-list] " Nikita Danilov
2001-09-21 12:18 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-21 12:31 ` Nikita Danilov
2001-09-23 23:49 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2001-09-20 18:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 18:58 ` Andrew Morton
2001-09-20 19:13 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=20010924094959.4b6725c0.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de \
--cc=Nikita@namesys.com \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=kuib-kl@ljbc.wa.edu.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mason@suse.com \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
/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