[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130311212510.GA9829@Krystal>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:25:10 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Subject: Re: wfcqueue (in Userspace RCU) for Linux kernel (for epoll)
* Eric Wong (normalperson@...t.net) wrote:
> Hi, I'm looking to reduce contention for the ep->lock spin lock in epoll.
>
> I came across wfcqueue in Userspace RCU and am wondering if there's any
> reason (other that lack of developer time/users) it hasn't been adapted
> for the Linux kernel.
>
> I'd be happy to do the work if it's suitable (and omit parts which
> may not be, such as busy wait).
Hi Eric,
I'm glad you're interested in our data structure!
I actually have a port ready, I just lacked the time for thorough
testing and also lacked users of the API at kernel-level. It looks like
now would be a good time to send the patch your way as a RFC!
> Using a mutex lock (while in process context) for dequeue works for
> epoll. I mainly want a lock-free enqueue for ep_poll_callback since
> that may be called in IRQ context.
You'd get even better than this: wait-free enqueue, with a simple xchg
and store.
>
> I suppose I can also use the llist LIFO in ep_poll_callback and
> reverse that while in process context, too...
Yeah, but that seems more expensive than just having the list in the
right order already. ;)
Patch incoming in a separate post,
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
>
> ref: http://git.lttng.org/userspace-rcu.git
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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