[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1206897488.4593.11.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:18:08 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc (+namespaces broken with
SEM_UNDO)
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 16:12 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 20:08 +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> >
> >
> >> just the normal performance of 2.6.25-rc3 is abyssimal, 55 to 60% slower
> >> than 2.6.18.8:
> >>
> >
> > After manually reverting 3e148c79938aa39035669c1cfa3ff60722134535,
> > 2.6.25.git scaled linearly
> We can't just revert that patch: with IDR, a global lock is mandatory :-(
> We must either revert the whole idea of using IDR or live with the
> reduced scalability.
Yeah, I looked at the problem, but didn't know what the heck to do about
it, so just grabbed my axe to verify/quantify.
> Actually, there are further bugs: the undo structures are not
> namespace-aware, thus semop with SEM_UNDO, unshare, create new array
> with same id, but more semaphores, another semop with SEM_UNDO will
> corrupt kernel memory :-(
> I'll try to clean up the bugs first, then I'll look at the scalability
> again.
Great!
-Mike
--
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