From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sachin Sant <sachinp@in.ibm.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpuhotplug: make get_online_cpus() scalability by using percpu counter
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 14:12:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100409121235.GA5784@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100407135456.GA12029@redhat.com>
On 04/07, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 04/07, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >
> > Old get_online_cpus() is read-preference, I think the goal of this ability
> > is allow get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus() to be called nested.
>
> Sure, I understand why you added task_struct->get_online_cpus_nest.
>
> > and use per-task counter for allowing get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus()
> > to be called nested, I think this deal is absolutely worth.
>
> As I said, I am not going to argue. I can't justify this tradeoff.
But, I must admit, I'd like to avoid adding the new member to task_struct.
What do you think about the code below?
I didn't even try to compile it, just to explain what I mean.
In short: we have the per-cpu fast counters, plus the slow counter
which is only used when cpu_hotplug_begin() is in progress.
Oleg.
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, cpuhp_fast_ctr);
static struct task_struct *cpuhp_writer;
static DEFINE_MUTEX(cpuhp_slow_lock)
static long cpuhp_slow_ctr;
static bool update_fast_ctr(int inc)
{
bool success = true;
preempt_disable();
if (likely(!cpuhp_writer))
__get_cpu_var(cpuhp_fast_ctr) += inc;
else if (cpuhp_writer != current)
success = false;
preempt_enable();
return success;
}
void get_online_cpus(void)
{
if (likely(update_fast_ctr(+1));
return;
mutex_lock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
cpuhp_slow_ctr++;
mutex_unlock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
}
void put_online_cpus(void)
{
if (likely(update_fast_ctr(-1));
return;
mutex_lock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
if (!--cpuhp_slow_ctr && cpuhp_writer)
wake_up_process(cpuhp_writer);
mutex_unlock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
}
static void clear_fast_ctr(void)
{
long total = 0;
int cpu;
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
total += per_cpu(cpuhp_fast_ctr, cpu);
per_cpu(cpuhp_fast_ctr, cpu) = 0;
}
return total;
}
static void cpu_hotplug_begin(void)
{
cpuhp_writer = current;
synchronize_sched();
/* Nobody except us can use can use cpuhp_fast_ctr */
mutex_lock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
cpuhp_slow_ctr += clear_fast_ctr();
while (cpuhp_slow_ctr) {
__set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
mutex_unlock(&&cpuhp_slow_lock);
schedule();
mutex_lock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
}
}
static void cpu_hotplug_done(void)
{
cpuhp_writer = NULL;
mutex_unlock(&cpuhp_slow_lock);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-09 12:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-05 10:38 [PATCH 2/2] cpuhotplug: make get_online_cpus() scalability by using percpu counter Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-05 16:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-06 12:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-07 13:35 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-07 13:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-04-09 12:12 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-04-12 9:24 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-12 9:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-12 12:30 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-12 12:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-13 1:47 ` Lai Jiangshan
2010-04-12 18:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20100409121235.GA5784@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nfont@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=sachinp@in.ibm.com \
--cc=shane.wang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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