| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 08:35:15 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] sched: Provide delayed wakeup list
On 09/14/2011 06:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Provide means to queue wakeup targets for later mass wakeup.
>
> This is useful for locking primitives that can effect multiple wakeups
> per operation and want to avoid lock internal lock contention by
> delaying the wakeups until we've released the lock internal locks.
I believe Michel (on CC) was interested in a related sort of thing for
read/write mechanisms with futexes. We discussed a way to accomplish
what he was interested in without changes to futexes, but this wakeup
list may also be of interest to him.
>
> Alternatively it can be used to avoid issuing multiple wakeups, and
> thus save a few cycles, in packet processing. Queue all target tasks
> and wakeup once you've processed all packets. That way you avoid
> waking the target task multiple times if there were multiple packets
> for the same task.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> ---
> include/linux/sched.h | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/sched.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/sched.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -1065,6 +1065,19 @@ struct uts_namespace;
> struct rq;
> struct sched_domain;
>
> +struct wake_list_head {
> + struct wake_list_node *first;
> +};
> +
> +struct wake_list_node {
> + struct wake_list_node *next;
> +};
> +
> +#define WAKE_LIST_TAIL ((struct wake_list_node *)0x01)
> +
> +#define WAKE_LIST(name) \
> + struct wake_list_head name = { WAKE_LIST_TAIL }
> +
> /*
> * wake flags
> */
> @@ -1255,6 +1268,8 @@ struct task_struct {
> unsigned int btrace_seq;
> #endif
>
> + struct wake_list_node wake_list;
> +
> unsigned int policy;
> cpumask_t cpus_allowed;
>
> @@ -2143,6 +2158,35 @@ extern void wake_up_new_task(struct task
> extern void sched_fork(struct task_struct *p);
> extern void sched_dead(struct task_struct *p);
>
> +static inline void
> +wake_list_add(struct wake_list_head *head, struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + struct wake_list_node *n = &p->wake_list;
> +
> + get_task_struct(p);
> + /*
> + * Atomically grab the task, if ->wake_list is !0 already it means
> + * its already queued (either by us or someone else) and will get the
> + * wakeup due to that.
> + *
> + * This cmpxchg() implies a full barrier, which pairs with the write
> + * barrier implied by the wakeup in wake_up_list().
> + */
> + if (cmpxchg(&n->next, 0, n) != 0) {
> + /* It was already queued, drop the extra ref and we're done. */
> + put_task_struct(p);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * The head is context local, there can be no concurrency.
> + */
> + n->next = head->first;
> + head->first = n;
> +}
> +
> +extern void wake_up_list(struct wake_list_head *head, unsigned int state);
> +
> extern void proc_caches_init(void);
> extern void flush_signals(struct task_struct *);
> extern void __flush_signals(struct task_struct *);
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -2916,6 +2916,25 @@ int wake_up_state(struct task_struct *p,
> return try_to_wake_up(p, state, 0);
> }
>
Maybe just my obsession with documentation and having my head in futex.c
for so long, but I'd love to see some proper kerneldoc function
commentary here... Admittedly, the inline comments are very helpful for
the most part. Missing here is what the value of state should be when
calling wake_up_list.
> +void wake_up_list(struct wake_list_head *head, unsigned int state)
> +{
> + struct wake_list_node *n = head->first;
> + struct task_struct *p;
> +
> + while (n != WAKE_LIST_TAIL) {
> + p = container_of(n, struct task_struct, wake_list);
> + n = n->next;
> +
> + p->wake_list.next = NULL;
> + /*
> + * wake_up_state() implies a wmb() to pair with the queueing
> + * in wake_list_add() so as not to miss wakeups.
> + */
> + wake_up_state(p, state);
> + put_task_struct(p);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Perform scheduler related setup for a newly forked process p.
> * p is forked by current.
> @@ -2943,6 +2962,8 @@ static void __sched_fork(struct task_str
> #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS
> INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&p->preempt_notifiers);
> #endif
> +
> + p->wake_list.next = NULL;
> }
>
> /*
>
>
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
--
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