linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] af_unix: unix_write

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1290558491.2866.125.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:28:11 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>
Cc:	Pauli Nieminen <pauli.nieminen@...labora.co.uk>,
	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...gmbh.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_unix: unix_write_space() use keyed wakeups

Le mercredi 24 novembre 2010 à 00:20 +0000, Alban Crequy a écrit :
> Le Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:27:56 +0200,
> Pauli Nieminen <pauli.nieminen@...labora.co.uk> a écrit :
> 
> > ----- Original message -----
> > > Le Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:44:44 +0200,
> > > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> a écrit :
> > > 
> > > > We still loop on 800 items, on each
> > > > wake_up_interruptible_sync_poll() call, so maybe we want to
> > > > optimize this later, adding a global key, ORing all items keys. I
> > > > dont think its worth the added complexity, given the biased usage
> > > > of your program (800 'listeners' to one event). Is it a real life
> > > > scenario ?
> > > 
> > > Pauli Nieminen told me about his performance problem in select() so
> > > I wrote the test program but I don't know what exactly is the real
> > > life scenario.
> > > 
> > 
> > Real world scenario is xsever that has tens client connections to
> > manage. When xserver is happily sleeping at seclect call some client
> > reading events/replies from server triggers in kernel looping over
> > all xserver fds. xserver isn't waiting for socket to became writeable
> > in ussual cases so kernel schedules back to client.
> 
> But are they SOCK_STREAM or SOCK_DGRAM sockets? The patches fix
> performances with SOCK_DGRAM. If the xserver scenario is with
> SOCK_STREAM sockets, your problem is probably still unfixed.
> 


It should not matter ?

commit 67426b756c4d52c51 (af_unix: use keyed wakeups ) makes
unix_write_space() call wake_up_interruptible_sync_poll() instead of
wake_up_interruptible_sync().

So it should be fixed for both STREAM/DGRAM sockets ?



--
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/