From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFS cpu scheduler and skip list implementation
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 22:45:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110929204505.GA8810@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201109241838.06941.kernel@kolivas.org>
Hi Con,
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 06:38:06PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> That's great then. I'm sure we'd explode in other weird and wonderful ways
> before the CPU load ever got to 64k. Plus all that would happen is that it
> would start degenerating from O(log n) insertion to O(n) as the number way
> surpassed 64k. The number 16 for levels was simply chosen as the one
> originally used by William Pugh in his sample code, but seems to be ample for
> this application.
If you're interested, during the early CFS benchmarks a few years ago, I
reworked my old binary tree code to make it kernel-compatible. By this, I
mean that it never needs to allocate memory, it's used just like rbtrees
or kernel lists, by having a node in your structure and inserting it from
the root of a tree. It offers the following features :
- O(log(N)) insertion/lookup
- O(1) removal
- O(1) next/prev walk
- 20 bytes per node on 32-bit pointers, 36-bytes on 64-bit pointers, plus
the key
- supports unique or multiple occurrences of the same key (walked in
insertion order and classed in trees)
- supports 32/64 bit signed/unsigned integers, strings and memory blocks
- supports prefixes (eg. to insert IP addresses with masks)
- supports lookup of greater than or equal to, less than or equal to.
I replaced the rbtree that was used in haproxy's scheduler with this new
code and measured a noticeable performance improvement, since haproxy
does insert/next/remove a lot of times a second, and not having to balance
a tree saves a huge number of cycles.
I remember having conducted some tests on CFS a log time ago with it, but
the only cases where I observed a gain was when running insane amounts of
tasks at insane context switching rates, which was biased and irrealistic.
So I stopped trying to put it into the kernel at that time.
Maybe for your usage it might bring some value. Take a look at the code
here if you want, it's not too much documented but still enough to start
with it. There are a few examples that can help get it right. I know that
a few people use it for their own projects and they did not ask for help :-)
http://git.1wt.eu/web?p=ebtree.git;a=summary
Cheers,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-29 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-23 23:45 BFS cpu scheduler and skip list implementation Con Kolivas
2011-09-24 1:21 ` Andi Kleen
2011-09-24 2:14 ` Con Kolivas
2011-09-24 7:35 ` Andi Kleen
2011-09-24 8:38 ` Con Kolivas
2011-09-29 20:45 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2011-09-29 22:58 ` Con Kolivas
2011-09-30 4:58 ` Willy Tarreau
2011-09-25 9:04 ` Heinz Diehl
2011-09-25 9:13 ` Con Kolivas
2011-09-25 11:16 ` Heinz Diehl
2011-09-25 11:19 ` Con Kolivas
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=20110929204505.GA8810@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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