From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Gargi Sharma <gs051095@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@surriel.com,
julia.lawall@lip6.fr, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mingo@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@oracle.com,
ktkhai@virtuozzo.com, oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Replace PID bitmap allocation with IDR API
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 12:18:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ing4vz5b.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1506488388.git.gs051095@gmail.com> (Gargi Sharma's message of "Wed, 27 Sep 2017 01:06:01 -0400")
Gargi Sharma <gs051095@gmail.com> writes:
> This patch series replaces kernel bitmap implementation of PID allocation
> with IDR API. These patches are written to simplify the kernel by replacing custom code with calls to generic code.
>
> The following are the stats for pid and pid_namespace object files
> before and after the replacement. There is a noteworthy change between
> the IDR and bitmap implementation.
>
> Before
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 8447 3894 64 12405 3075 kernel/pid.o
> After
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 3301 304 0 3605 e15 kernel/pid.o
>
> Before
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 5692 1842 192 7726 1e2e kernel/pid_namespace.o
> After
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 2870 216 16 3102 c1e kernel/pid_namespace.o
>
> There wasn't a considerable difference between the time required for
> allocation of PIDs to the processes.
How about the time to call readdir on /proc?
How many processes were you testing with?
Why just the bitmap? Why not update the hash table as well.
An rbtree or an rhashtable might be better.
Hmm. Oh look there is patch 2/2 and you do replace the hashtable with
the idr as well. Now I am very interested in a comparison of data
structures.
How does the runtime memory footprint of your new pid hash
implementation compare to the old memory footprint?
There are a lot of options in this space and it does not sound like you
have looked at the options very thoroughly.
I am a little worried that in the quest to reuse code you may have made the
total amount of code executed larger and more susceptible to more cache line
misses.
>From what Oleg has pointed out and from your the holes in your
description I am generally leery of this patchset as the attention to
detail was appears lower than necessary for this to be more than a proof
of concept.
Eric
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Removed redundant IDR function that was introduced
> in the previous patchset.
> - Renamed PIDNS_HASH_ADDING
> - Used idr_for_each_entry_continue()
> - Used idr_find() to lookup pids
>
> Gargi Sharma (2):
> pid: Replace pid bitmap implementation with IDR API
> pid: Remove pidhash
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/sched.c | 2 +-
> fs/proc/loadavg.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/init_task.h | 1 -
> include/linux/pid.h | 2 -
> include/linux/pid_namespace.h | 18 +--
> init/main.c | 3 +-
> kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
> kernel/pid.c | 239 +++++-------------------------
> kernel/pid_namespace.c | 54 +++----
> 9 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 255 deletions(-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-27 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-27 5:06 [PATCH v2 0/2] Replace PID bitmap allocation with IDR API Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 5:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] pid: Replace pid bitmap implementation " Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 13:09 ` Rik van Riel
2017-09-27 14:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-09-27 15:06 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 15:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-09-27 15:05 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 15:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-10-01 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-01 10:35 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-10-02 13:14 ` Rik van Riel
2017-10-02 13:05 ` Rik van Riel
2017-09-27 5:06 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] pid: Remove pidhash Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 15:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-09-27 16:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-09-30 15:41 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-10-02 15:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-10-02 13:35 ` Rik van Riel
2017-10-02 13:45 ` Rik van Riel
2017-10-02 15:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2017-10-02 15:22 ` Rik van Riel
2017-10-02 16:27 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-09-27 17:18 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
[not found] ` <CAOCi2DESqWV2YPcRTe6NYjx6m6N19ewXbAyfLfeBa23kJiEO9Q@mail.gmail.com>
2017-09-28 19:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Replace PID bitmap allocation with IDR API Rik van Riel
2017-09-28 20:05 ` Gargi Sharma
2017-09-29 0:35 ` Rik van Riel
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=87ing4vz5b.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gs051095@gmail.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@oracle.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
/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