linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] wfcqueue: implement __wfcq_enqueue

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: <20130407150253.GA10154@Krystal>
Date:	Sun, 7 Apr 2013 11:02:53 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:	Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] wfcqueue: implement __wfcq_enqueue_head() (v2)

* Eric Wong (normalperson@...t.net) wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> > Implement enqueue-to-head. It can run concurrently with enqueue, splice
> > to queue, and iteration, but requires a mutex against dequeue and splice
> > from queue operations.
> > 
> > Useful for special-cases where a queue needs to have nodes enqueued into
> > its head.
> > 
> > This patch is only compile-tested.
> > 
> > Changes since v1:
> > * Don't require mutual exclusion between traversals and
> >   __wfcq_enqueue_head().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> 
> Thanks!  The first hunk (sync table comment) conflicted with
> my __wfcq_enqueue patch, but other than that I could not benchmark any
> regression with my 4-core machine with v4 of my
> "epoll: avoid spinlock contention with wfcqueue" patch.
> 
> All I needed was "s/__wfcq_prepend/__wfcq_enqueue_head/g" to my original
> patch to use the updated API.
> 
> I was worried about the cmpxchg at first, but it does not seem to hurt
> performance on my 4-core system.  In fact, it was slightly better
> (but within margin of error)
> 
> time ./eponeshotmt -c 1000000 -w 4 -t 4 -f 10
> real    0m 5.78s
> user    0m 1.20s
> sys     0m 21.90s
> 
> Tested-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
> 
> Hopefully somebody can test my epoll patches with more cores/threads :)

Thanks for testing. Taking care of your comments, and of memory
barriers, brings me to send a v3 of this patch shortly. Testing is
welcome!

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
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/