linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] scalable rw

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 12 May 2007 11:06:24 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scalable rw_mutex

On 12 May 2007 20:55:28 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 11 May 2007 10:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
> > Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 11 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > 
> > > > yipes.  percpu_counter_sum() is expensive.
> > > 
> > > Capable of triggering NMI watchdog on 4096+ processors?
> > 
> > Well.  That would be a millisecond per cpu which sounds improbable.  And
> > we'd need to be calling it under local_irq_save() which we presently don't.
> > And nobody has reported any problems against the existing callsites.
> > 
> > But it's no speed demon, that's for sure.
> 
> There is one possible optimization for this I did some time ago. You don't really
> need to sum all over the possible map, but only all CPUs that were ever 
> online. But this only helps on systems where the possible map is bigger
> than online map in the common case. But that shouldn't be the case anymore on x86
> -- it just used to be. If it's true on some other architectures it might
> be still worth it.
> 

hm, yeah.

We could put a cpumask in percpu_counter, initialise it to
cpu_possible_map.  Then, those callsites which have hotplug notifiers can
call into new percpu_counter functions which clear and set bits in that
cpumask and which drain percpu_counter.counts[cpu] into
percpu_counter.count.

And percpu_counter_sum() gets taught to do for_each_cpu_mask(fbc->cpumask).
-
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/