From: "Dmitry Adamushko" <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
To: "Pavel Emelianov" <xemul@sw.ru>
Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kernel/pid.c pid allocation wierdness
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:40:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b647ffbd0703160440sd678cedsc8406ef2b1f030c0@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45FA7823.2040104@sw.ru>
On 16/03/07, Pavel Emelianov <xemul@sw.ru> wrote:
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 03/14, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Pavel Emelianov <xemul@sw.ru> writes:
> >>
> >>> Hi.
> >>>
> >>> I'm looking at how alloc_pid() works and can't understand
> >>> one (simple/stupid) thing.
> >>>
> >>> It first kmem_cache_alloc()-s a strct pid, then calls
> >>> alloc_pidmap() and at the end it taks a global pidmap_lock()
> >>> to add new pid to hash.
> >
> > We need some global lock. pidmap_lock is already here, and it is
> > only used to protect pidmap->page allocation. Iow, it is almost
> > unused. So it was very natural to re-use it while implementing
> > pidrefs.
> >
> >>> The question is - why does alloc_pidmap() use at least
> >>> two atomic ops and potentially loop to find a zero bit
> >>> in pidmap? Why not call alloc_pidmap() under pidmap_lock
> >>> and find zero pid in pidmap w/o any loops and atomics?
> >
> > Currently we search for zero bit lockless, why do you want
> > to do it under spin_lock ?
>
> Search isn't lockless. Look:
>
> while (1) {
> if (!test_and_set_bit(...)) {
> atomic_dec(&nr_free);
> return pid;
> }
> we use two atomic operations to find and set a bit in a map.
While you may have a few concurrent threads competing for the same
"offset" and "pid" in the loop - e.g. at point [1] (see below), only
one will succeed with "registering" it due to the atomicity of
test_and_set_bit() and so only this one will get at point [2] with the
"pid".
The rest of the "unlucky" threads will either
(i) compete for another "offset" -> "pid" (as described above);
(ii) leave the loop when one of the conditions of while() becomes
"false" -> e.g. there are no more free slots in this map.
if (likely(atomic_read(&map->nr_free))) {
do {
// [1]
if (!test_and_set_bit(offset, map->page)) {
// [2]
atomic_dec(&map->nr_free);
pid_ns->last_pid = pid;
return pid;
}
offset = find_next_offset(map, offset);
pid = mk_pid(pid_ns, map, offset);
/*
* find_next_offset() found a bit, the pid from it
* is in-bounds, and if we fell back to the last
* bitmap block and the final block was the same
* as the starting point, pid is before last_pid.
*/
} while (offset < BITS_PER_PAGE && pid < pid_max &&
(i != max_scan || pid < last ||
!((last+1) & BITS_PER_PAGE_MASK)));
}
> ...
>
> > Oleg.
> >
> >
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-16 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-14 7:30 [RFC] kernel/pid.c pid allocation wierdness Pavel Emelianov
2007-03-14 14:12 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-14 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-14 16:54 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-15 20:26 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-16 13:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-16 19:46 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-03-16 21:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-03-14 15:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-16 10:57 ` Pavel Emelianov
2007-03-16 11:37 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-03-16 11:58 ` Pavel Emelianov
2007-03-16 11:40 ` Dmitry Adamushko [this message]
2007-03-14 14:43 ` William Lee Irwin III
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=b647ffbd0703160440sd678cedsc8406ef2b1f030c0@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@sw.ru \
/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