From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751172AbWFTOsW (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:48:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751167AbWFTOsW (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:48:22 -0400 Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:59821 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751172AbWFTOsW (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:48:22 -0400 From: Nick Piggin To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Andrew Morton , Paul McKenney Cc: Linux Kernel , Nick Piggin , Linux Memory Management Message-Id: <20060408134635.22479.79269.sendpatchset@linux.site> Subject: [patch 0/3] 2.6.17 radix-tree: updates and lockless Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:48:17 +0200 (CEST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I've finally ported the RCU radix tree over my radix tree direct-data patch (the latter patch has been in -mm for a while now). I've also done the last step required for submission, which was to make a small userspace RCU test harness, and wire up the rtth so that it can handle multiple threads to test the lockless capability. The RCU test harness uses an implementation somewhat like Paul's paper's quiescent state bitmask approach; with infrequent quiescent state updates, performance isn't bad. This quickly flushed out several obscure bugs just when running on my dual G5. After fixing those, I racked up about 100 CPU hours of testing on SUSE's 64-way Altix without problem. Also passes the normal battery of single threaded rtth tests. I'd like to hear views regarding merging these patches for 2.6.18. Initially the lockless code would not come into effect (good - one thing at a time) until tree_lock can start getting lifted in -mm and 2.6.19. Nick