lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 00:50:12 +0200 From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org> Subject: Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:41:24AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 07:30:27AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 13:40 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > This patch trades a page flag for a significant improvement in the unlock_page > > > fastpath. Various problems in the previous version were spotted by Hugh and > > > Ben (and fixed in this one). > > > > > > Comments? > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Speed up unlock_page by introducing a new page flag to signal that there are > > > page waitqueue waiters for PG_locked. This means a memory barrier and a random > > > waitqueue hash cacheline load can be avoided in the fastpath when there is no > > > contention. > > > > I'm not 100% familiar with the exclusive vs. non exclusive wait thingy > > but wake_up_page() does __wake_up_bit() which calls __wake_up() with > > nr_exclusive set to 1. Doesn't that mean that only one waiter will be > > woken up ? > > > > If that's the case, then we lose because we'll have clear PG_waiters but > > only wake up one of them. > > > > Waking them all would fix it but at the risk of causing other > > problems... Maybe PG_waiters need to actually be a counter but if that > > is the case, then it complicates things even more. > > > > Any smart idea ? > > It will wake up 1 exclusive waiter, but no limit on non exclusive waiters. > Hmm, but it won't wake up waiters behind the exclusive guy... maybe the > wake up code can check whether the waitqueue is still active after the > wakeup, and set PG_waiters again in that case? Hm, I don't know if we can do that without a race either... OTOH, waking all non exclusive waiters may not be a really bad idea. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists