From: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
jack@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, eparis@redhat.com,
john@johnmccutchan.com, rlove@rlove.org,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched files
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 09:50:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558ADFEA.7020905@sr71.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150623002614.GD3892@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 06/22/2015 05:26 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> OK, here is an experimental patch that provides a fast-readers variant
> of RCU, forward-ported from v3.3. Because we didn't have call_srcu()
> and srcu_barrier() back then, it is not a drop-in replacement for SRCU,
> so you need to adapt the code to the API, which means putting an "fr"
> in front of the "srcu" in the API members.
>
> Understood on the overhead of the memory-barrier instruction showing
> up consistently. My point was instead that getting rid of this
> memory-barrier instruction does not come for free, as it greatly
> increases the latency of synchronize_frsrcu(). In a real workload,
> it is entirely possible that the savings from eliminating the memory
> barrier are overwhelmed by the increased grace-period latency.
>
> Anyway, the patch is below. Very lightly tested.
This does give a very similar performance boost as the other
optimization I posted. I measured this patch to boost the writes/second
by 11.0% while my previous optimization did 10.8%.
I don't think this workload will see any of the overhead of the
synchronize_frsrcu(), though, but this helps confirm the source of the
overhead.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-24 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-19 21:50 [RFC][PATCH] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched files Dave Hansen
2015-06-19 23:33 ` Andi Kleen
2015-06-20 0:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-20 0:39 ` Dave Hansen
2015-06-20 2:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-20 18:02 ` Dave Hansen
2015-06-21 1:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-22 13:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-22 15:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-22 15:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-22 16:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-22 19:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-23 0:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-22 18:50 ` Dave Hansen
2015-06-23 0:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-24 16:50 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2015-06-24 17:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-22 18:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-23 0:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-06-23 15:17 ` Jan Kara
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=558ADFEA.7020905@sr71.net \
--to=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=john@johnmccutchan.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rlove@rlove.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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