[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090209111755.6bc2b93e@gondolin>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:17:55 +0100
From: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fastboot: keep at least one thread per cpu during boot
On Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:27:48 -0800,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 04:48:27 +0100
> Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Async threads are created and destroyed depending on the number of
> > jobs in queue. It means that several async threads can be created for
> > a specific batch of work, then the threads will die after the
> > completion of this batch, but they could be needed just after this
> > completion for another batch of work. During the boot, such
> > repetitive thread creations can be wasteful, that's why this patch
> > proposes to keep at least one thread per cpu (if they already have
> > been created once). Such a threshold of threads kept alive will
> > prevent from a part of the thread creation overhead. This threshold
> > will be dropped one the system_state switches from SYSTEM_BOOTING to
> > SYSTEM_RUNNING.
>
> I'm not very fond of this to be honest;
> at least during boot there's enough activity, and the time is so short
> (that's the point of the parallel stuff!) that this will not kick in to
> make a difference; specifically, every boot I've seen the number of
> threads is highest near the end, and also the total kernel boot time is
> below 1.5 seconds or so, not long enough for the threads to die.
>
> Creating a thread is *CHEAP*. Really really cheap. You can do 100
> thousands/second on even a modest CPU. If you have a high frequency of
> events, you don't want this, sure, and that is why there is a one
> second delay to give opportunity for reuse... but really....
Agreed.
>
>
> Now, if async function calls get used more, I can see the point of
> always keeping one thread alive, just for both performance and VM low
> memory issues; but that's not what your patch is doing.
I'd argue that the ability to _schedule_ async stuff without memory
allocation would help more with low memory situations - after all, the
work has been scheduled for later.
(For that, I have hacked up the following completely untested patch,
but I'm not yet completely happy with it.)
---
include/linux/async.h | 19 +++++++++
kernel/async.c | 105 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/async.h
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/async.h
@@ -16,9 +16,28 @@
typedef u64 async_cookie_t;
typedef void (async_func_ptr) (void *data, async_cookie_t cookie);
+/**
+ * struct async_entry - entry for asynchronous scheduling
+ * @list: anchor for internal lists
+ * @cookie: cookie for checkpointing
+ * @func: asynchronous function to execute
+ * @data: data to pass to the function
+ * @running: synchronization domain to use
+ * @persistent: 1 if the entry must not be deleted by the core
+ */
+struct async_entry {
+ struct list_head list;
+ async_cookie_t cookie;
+ async_func_ptr *func;
+ void *data;
+ struct list_head *running;
+ int *persistent;
+};
+
extern async_cookie_t async_schedule(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data);
extern async_cookie_t async_schedule_domain(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data,
struct list_head *list);
+extern async_cookie_t async_schedule_prealloc(struct async_entry *entry);
extern void async_synchronize_full(void);
extern void async_synchronize_full_domain(struct list_head *list);
extern void async_synchronize_cookie(async_cookie_t cookie);
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/async.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/async.c
@@ -68,14 +68,6 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(async_lock);
static int async_enabled = 0;
-struct async_entry {
- struct list_head list;
- async_cookie_t cookie;
- async_func_ptr *func;
- void *data;
- struct list_head *running;
-};
-
static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(async_done);
static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD(async_new);
@@ -157,7 +149,8 @@ static void run_one_entry(void)
list_del(&entry->list);
/* 5) free the entry */
- kfree(entry);
+ if (!entry->persistent)
+ kfree(entry);
atomic_dec(&entry_count);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&async_lock, flags);
@@ -170,34 +163,24 @@ out:
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&async_lock, flags);
}
-
-static async_cookie_t __async_schedule(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data, struct list_head *running)
+static async_cookie_t __async_run_sync(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data)
{
- struct async_entry *entry;
- unsigned long flags;
async_cookie_t newcookie;
-
+ unsigned long flags;
- /* allow irq-off callers */
- entry = kzalloc(sizeof(struct async_entry), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&async_lock, flags);
+ newcookie = next_cookie++;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&async_lock, flags);
- /*
- * If we're out of memory or if there's too much work
- * pending already, we execute synchronously.
- */
- if (!async_enabled || !entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK) {
- kfree(entry);
- spin_lock_irqsave(&async_lock, flags);
- newcookie = next_cookie++;
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&async_lock, flags);
-
- /* low on memory.. run synchronously */
- ptr(data, newcookie);
- return newcookie;
- }
- entry->func = ptr;
- entry->data = data;
- entry->running = running;
+ /* Run synchronously */
+ ptr(data, newcookie);
+ return newcookie;
+}
+
+static async_cookie_t __async_schedule(struct async_entry *entry)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+ async_cookie_t newcookie;
spin_lock_irqsave(&async_lock, flags);
newcookie = entry->cookie = next_cookie++;
@@ -208,6 +191,24 @@ static async_cookie_t __async_schedule(a
return newcookie;
}
+static struct async_entry *__async_generate_entry(async_func_ptr *ptr,
+ void *data,
+ struct list_head *running)
+{
+ struct async_entry *entry;
+
+ if (!async_enabled || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK)
+ return NULL;
+ /* allow irq-off callers */
+ entry = kzalloc(sizeof(struct async_entry), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (entry) {
+ entry->func = ptr;
+ entry->data = data;
+ entry->running = running;
+ }
+ return entry;
+}
+
/**
* async_schedule - schedule a function for asynchronous execution
* @ptr: function to execute asynchronously
@@ -218,7 +219,13 @@ static async_cookie_t __async_schedule(a
*/
async_cookie_t async_schedule(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data)
{
- return __async_schedule(ptr, data, &async_running);
+ struct async_entry *entry;
+
+ entry = __async_generate_entry(ptr, data, &async_running);
+ if (entry)
+ return __async_schedule(entry);
+ else
+ return __async_run_sync(ptr, data);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule);
@@ -237,11 +244,39 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule);
async_cookie_t async_schedule_domain(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data,
struct list_head *running)
{
- return __async_schedule(ptr, data, running);
+ struct async_entry *entry;
+
+ entry = __async_generate_entry(ptr, data, running);
+ if (entry)
+ return __async_schedule(entry);
+ else
+ return __async_run_sync(ptr, data);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule_domain);
/**
+ * async_schedule_prealloc - schedule a preallocated asynchronous entry
+ * @entry: pointer to asynchronous entry
+ *
+ * Returns an async_cookie_t that may be used for checkpointing later.
+ * The caller must have setup @entry before calling this function
+ * (especially @entry->func) and must make sure an entry is not scheduled
+ * multiple times simultaneously. @entry->running may be left blank to
+ * use the default synchronization domain.
+ * Note: This function may be called from atomic or non-atomic contexts.
+ */
+async_cookie_t async_schedule_prealloc(struct async_entry *entry)
+{
+ if (!entry->running)
+ entry->running = &async_running;
+ if (async_enabled && atomic_read(&entry_count) <= MAX_WORK)
+ return __async_schedule(entry);
+ else
+ return __async_run_sync(entry->func, entry->data);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_schedule_prealloc);
+
+/**
* async_synchronize_full - synchronize all asynchronous function calls
*
* This function waits until all asynchronous function calls have been done.
--
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