public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Werner Almesberger <werner@almesberger.net>
To: Rajesh Venkatasubramanian <vrajesh@umich.edu>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Generalize prio_tree (1/3)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:59:46 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041115195946.Z28802@almesberger.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0411151705260.6691@lazuli.engin.umich.edu>; from vrajesh@umich.edu on Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 05:27:42PM -0500

Rajesh Venkatasubramanian wrote:
> No, that's not possible. Whenever we change vm_pgoff, vm_start, or
> vm_end, we reshuffle the prio_tree. Check mm/mmap.c:vma_adjust().

Excellent, that makes it a lot easier.

> If you are thinking vm_set.head or vm_set.parent is free to use
> for h_index, then it is incorrect. No field is free. If a vma
> is a tree node (and in this discussion we care only about tree
> nodes), then every field in vma->shared is used. We cannot reuse
> them for storing h_index.

Oh, I see. I thought it was that either vm_set or prio_tree_node
was used. (Which I found somewhat confusing, but attributed my
confusion to simply not understanding all the strange ways of MM.)
Sorry about the confusion.

So yes, one more word then :-(

> If we impose that there can be only 2 types of prio_tree, then
> we can simply add an if-else condition in the GET_INDEX macro.
> IMHO, that will not lead to any noticeable performance drop.

Yes, that sounds better. It would also allow for a later transition
of VMA_PRIO_TREE to GENERIC_PRIO_TREE.

Now, if we want to prepare things already now for a later migration,
it would be nice to call the generic one "struct prio_tree_node",
since it would eventually become the only node type anyway.

Perhaps something along these lines:

struct prio_tree_node {
	struct vma_prio_tree_node prio_tree_node;
	unsigned long r_index, h_index;
};

Or would you consider this as premature optimization ?

> But, I agree with you that changing the layout of vm_area_struct
> is a better (but intrusive) approach.

I also wonder how expensive the calculations in HEAP_INDEX are.
Probably not very.

To make the intrusive change a bit more palatable, vm_pgoff could
become #define vm_pgoff(vma) ((vma)->shared.prio_tree_node.r_index)

Okay, so now we only need someone who has meaningful MM tests to
tell us how badly this would hurt performance :-)

Thanks,
- Werner

-- 
  _________________________________________________________________________
 / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina     werner@almesberger.net /
/_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/

  reply	other threads:[~2004-11-15 23:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-11-15  2:56 [RFC] Generalize prio_tree (1/3) Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15  2:59 ` [RFC] Make MM use generalized prio_tree (2/3) Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15  3:05   ` [RFC] prio_tree debugging functions (3/3) Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15  4:30 ` [RFC] Generalize prio_tree (1/3) Nick Piggin
2004-11-15  6:07   ` Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15 11:01     ` Nick Piggin
2004-11-15 14:32       ` Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15 18:13 ` Rajesh Venkatasubramanian
2004-11-15 20:54   ` Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15 21:14     ` Rajesh Venkatasubramanian
2004-11-15 21:42       ` Werner Almesberger
2004-11-15 22:27         ` Rajesh Venkatasubramanian
2004-11-15 22:59           ` Werner Almesberger [this message]
2004-11-16  0:07             ` Rajesh Venkatasubramanian
2004-11-16  0:35               ` Werner Almesberger
2004-11-16  1:48                 ` Rajesh Venkatasubramanian
2004-11-16 23:51               ` Generalize prio_tree, 2nd try Werner Almesberger
2004-11-17  1:28                 ` Werner Almesberger

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=20041115195946.Z28802@almesberger.net \
    --to=werner@almesberger.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=vrajesh@umich.edu \
    /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