From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@ixiacom.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@lhnet.ca>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@ixiacom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: allow netdev_wait_allrefs() to run faster
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:49:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091024054943.GA6638@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AE28429.6040608@gmail.com>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 06:35:53AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney a écrit :
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 05:40:07PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> [PATCH] net: allow netdev_wait_allrefs() to run faster
> >>
> >> netdev_wait_allrefs() waits that all references to a device vanishes.
> >>
> >> It currently uses a _very_ pessimistic 250 ms delay between each probe.
> >> Some users report that no more than 4 devices can be dismantled per second,
> >> this is a pretty serious problem for extreme setups.
> >>
> >> Most likely, references only wait for a rcu grace period that should come
> >> fast, so use a schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1) to allow faster recovery.
> >
> > Is this a place where synchronize_rcu_expedited() is appropriate?
> > (It went in to 2.6.32-rc1.)
>
> Thanks for the tip Paul
>
> I believe netdev_wait_allrefs() is not a perfect candidate, because
> synchronize_sched_expedited() seems really expensive.
It does indeed keep the CPUs quite busy for a bit. ;-)
> Maybe we could call it once only, if we had to call 1 times
> the jiffie delay ?
This could be a very useful approach!
However, please keep in mind that although synchronize_rcu_expedited()
forces a grace period, it does nothing to speed the invocation of other
RCU callbacks. In short, synchronize_rcu_expedited() is a faster version
of synchronize_rcu(), but doesn't necessarily help other synchronize_rcu()
or call_rcu() invocations.
The reason I point this out is that it looks to me that the code below is
waiting for some other task which is in turn waiting on a grace period.
But I don't know this code, so could easily be confused.
Thanx, paul
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index fa88dcd..9b04b9a 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -4970,6 +4970,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(register_netdev);
> static void netdev_wait_allrefs(struct net_device *dev)
> {
> unsigned long rebroadcast_time, warning_time;
> + unsigned int count = 0;
>
> rebroadcast_time = warning_time = jiffies;
> while (atomic_read(&dev->refcnt) != 0) {
> @@ -4995,7 +4996,10 @@ static void netdev_wait_allrefs(struct net_device *dev)
> rebroadcast_time = jiffies;
> }
>
> - msleep(250);
> + if (count++ == 1)
> + synchronize_rcu_expedited();
> + else
> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
>
> if (time_after(jiffies, warning_time + 10 * HZ)) {
> printk(KERN_EMERG "unregister_netdevice: "
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-24 5:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-17 22:18 [PATCH/RFC] make unregister_netdev() delete more than 4 interfaces per second Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-18 4:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-18 16:13 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-18 17:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-18 18:21 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-18 19:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-21 12:39 ` Octavian Purdila
2009-10-21 15:40 ` [PATCH] net: allow netdev_wait_allrefs() to run faster Eric Dumazet
2009-10-21 16:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-21 16:51 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-21 19:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-29 23:07 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-29 23:38 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-30 1:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-30 14:35 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-30 14:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-30 23:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-30 23:53 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2009-10-31 0:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-08-09 17:23 ` Ben Greear
2010-08-09 17:34 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2010-08-09 17:44 ` Ben Greear
2010-08-09 17:48 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2010-08-09 18:03 ` Ben Greear
2010-08-09 19:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-08-09 21:03 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2010-08-09 21:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-21 16:55 ` Octavian Purdila
2009-10-23 21:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-10-24 4:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-24 5:49 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2009-10-24 8:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-24 13:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-10-24 14:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-24 14:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-10-24 23:49 ` Octavian Purdila
2009-10-25 4:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-10-25 8:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-25 15:19 ` Octavian Purdila
2009-10-25 19:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-10-24 20:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=20091024054943.GA6638@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bcrl@lhnet.ca \
--cc=cratiu@ixiacom.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=opurdila@ixiacom.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).