From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>,
Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@gmail.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@linbit.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] idr: avoid ping-pong
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 18:43:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5352535D.8030407@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140418171717.GE23576@htj.dyndns.org>
On 04/19/2014 01:17 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 08:49:53PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> The ida callers always calls ida_pre_get() before ida_get_new*().
>> ida_pre_get() will do layer allocation, and ida_get_new*() will do layer removal.
>>
>> It causes an unneeded ping-pong. The speculative layer removal in
>> ida_get_new*() can't result expected optimization.
>>
>> So we remove the unneeded layer removal in ida_get_new*().
>
> But the as comment says, ida doesn't want to keep extra layers around
> as it wants to keep its memory footprint minimal.
It only frees one layer. And the ida_pre_get() for the next ida_get_new*()
will allocation it back again. The aim "Throw away extra resources one by one"
can't be achieved. It can't keep its memory footprint minimal.
> I think the right
> thing to do is implementing ida_preload() which is simliar to
> idr_preload() and do away with per-ida layer cache.
Yes and no.
We need a static private ida_preload() for ida_simple_get() only.
Because the IDA doesn't have any query-function, so IDA's own synchronization
is enough for all use cases, IDA should off-loads the caller's
synchronization burden.
In my todo-list, IDA only needs the following functions. other functions
will be deprecated and scheduled to be removed:
void ida_destroy(struct ida *ida);
void ida_init(struct ida *ida);
int ida_simple_get(struct ida *ida, unsigned int start, unsigned int end,
gfp_t gfp_mask);
void ida_simple_remove(struct ida *ida, unsigned int id);
(I don't think we need any query-function, But...)
If in the future we need some query-functions such as:
ida_is_this_id_allocated()
ida_find_next_[un]allocated_id(),
In this case, we can expose the ida_preload() and ida_alloc() at the same time that
we introduce the query-functions.
Any thought?
But we need to remove this unneeded ping-pong despite of any plan.
Thanks,
Lai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-19 10:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-18 12:49 [PATCH 0/8] idr: fix & cleanup Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 1/8] idr: fix overflow bug for the max-high layer Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 16:29 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 17:08 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:10 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 2/8] idr: fix unexpected id-removal when idr_remove(unallocated_id) Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 16:57 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 3/8] idr: fix NULL pointer dereference when ida_remove(unallocated_id) Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:09 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 4/8] idr: fix idr_replace()'s returned error code Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:12 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 5/8] idr: covert BUG_ON() to WARN_ON_ONCE() if the argument is invalid Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:14 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 6/8] idr: avoid ping-pong Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:17 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-19 10:43 ` Lai Jiangshan [this message]
2014-04-19 13:01 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-19 14:23 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 7/8] idr: don't need to shink the free list when idr_remove() Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:19 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-18 12:49 ` [PATCH 8/8] idr: reduce the unneeded check in free_layer() Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-18 17:21 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 0/9 V2] idr: fix & cleanup Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 1/9 V2] idr: fix overflow bug during maximum ID calculation at maximum height Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 2/9 V2] idr: fix unexpected ID-removal when idr_remove(unallocated_id) Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 3/9 V2] idr: fix NULL pointer dereference when ida_remove(unallocated_id) Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 4/9 V2] idr: fix idr_replace()'s returned error code Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 5/9 V2] idr: covert BUG_ON() to WARN_ON_ONCE() if the argument is invalid Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 13:07 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-19 14:04 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 23:47 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 6/9 V2] idr: avoid ping-pong Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 7/9 V2] idr: don't need to shink the free list when idr_remove() Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 8/9 V2] idr: reduce the unneeded check in free_layer() Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 9/9 V2] idr: remove useless C-PreProcessor branch Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-19 23:51 ` Tejun Heo
2014-04-20 3:56 ` Lai Jiangshan
2014-04-20 11:29 ` Tejun Heo
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=5352535D.8030407@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=agruen@linbit.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jdelvare@suse.de \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=monamagarwal123@gmail.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=tj@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