[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110929204505.GA8810@1wt.eu>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 22:45:05 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFS cpu scheduler and skip list implementation
Hi Con,
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 06:38:06PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> That's great then. I'm sure we'd explode in other weird and wonderful ways
> before the CPU load ever got to 64k. Plus all that would happen is that it
> would start degenerating from O(log n) insertion to O(n) as the number way
> surpassed 64k. The number 16 for levels was simply chosen as the one
> originally used by William Pugh in his sample code, but seems to be ample for
> this application.
If you're interested, during the early CFS benchmarks a few years ago, I
reworked my old binary tree code to make it kernel-compatible. By this, I
mean that it never needs to allocate memory, it's used just like rbtrees
or kernel lists, by having a node in your structure and inserting it from
the root of a tree. It offers the following features :
- O(log(N)) insertion/lookup
- O(1) removal
- O(1) next/prev walk
- 20 bytes per node on 32-bit pointers, 36-bytes on 64-bit pointers, plus
the key
- supports unique or multiple occurrences of the same key (walked in
insertion order and classed in trees)
- supports 32/64 bit signed/unsigned integers, strings and memory blocks
- supports prefixes (eg. to insert IP addresses with masks)
- supports lookup of greater than or equal to, less than or equal to.
I replaced the rbtree that was used in haproxy's scheduler with this new
code and measured a noticeable performance improvement, since haproxy
does insert/next/remove a lot of times a second, and not having to balance
a tree saves a huge number of cycles.
I remember having conducted some tests on CFS a log time ago with it, but
the only cases where I observed a gain was when running insane amounts of
tasks at insane context switching rates, which was biased and irrealistic.
So I stopped trying to put it into the kernel at that time.
Maybe for your usage it might bring some value. Take a look at the code
here if you want, it's not too much documented but still enough to start
with it. There are a few examples that can help get it right. I know that
a few people use it for their own projects and they did not ask for help :-)
http://git.1wt.eu/web?p=ebtree.git;a=summary
Cheers,
Willy
--
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