[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1279176663.2096.1264.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:51:03 +0800
From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, andi.kleen@...el.com
Subject: [PATCH] Don't apply for write lock on tasklist_lock if parent
doesn't ptrace other processes
We run some sub-cases (fork, exec, pipe, tcp, udp) of aim7 on 8-socket machine.
Perf shows write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock) consumes more than 50% cpu time.
One hot caller is exit_ptrace. If the exiting process doesn't ptrace other
processes, kernel needn't apply for the write lock on tasklist_lock.
With below patch against kernel 2.6.35-rc5, we get more than 10% result improvement.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
---
diff -Nraup linux-2.6.35-rc5/kernel/ptrace.c linux-2.6.35-rc5_ptrace/kernel/ptrace.c
--- linux-2.6.35-rc5/kernel/ptrace.c 2010-07-16 14:01:15.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.35-rc5_ptrace/kernel/ptrace.c 2010-07-16 14:03:20.000000000 +0800
@@ -331,6 +331,9 @@ void exit_ptrace(struct task_struct *tra
struct task_struct *p, *n;
LIST_HEAD(ptrace_dead);
+ if (list_empty(&tracer->ptraced))
+ return;
+
write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
list_for_each_entry_safe(p, n, &tracer->ptraced, ptrace_entry) {
if (__ptrace_detach(tracer, p))
--
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