[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrWg9sdyoKg0-BkwKQgyANvJybQ_wqjTfvYEGW1+S1J5Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 13:09:08 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Add epoll round robin wakeup mode
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote:
> On 02/17/2015 02:46 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote:
>>> When we are sharing a wakeup source among multiple epoll fds, we end up with
>>> thundering herd wakeups, since there is currently no way to add to the
>>> wakeup source exclusively. This series introduces 2 new epoll flags,
>>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE for adding to a wakeup source exclusively. And EPOLLROUNDROBIN
>>> which is to be used in conjunction to EPOLLEXCLUSIVE to evenly
>>> distribute the wakeups. This patch was originally motivated by a desire to
>>> improve wakeup balance and cpu usage for a listen socket() shared amongst
>>> multiple epoll fd sets.
>>>
>>> See: http://lwn.net/Articles/632590/ for previous test program and testing
>>> resutls.
>>>
>>> Epoll manpage text:
>>>
>>> EPOLLEXCLUSIVE
>>> Provides exclusive wakeups when attaching multiple epoll fds to a
>>> shared wakeup source. Must be specified with an EPOLL_CTL_ADD operation.
>>>
>>> EPOLLROUNDROBIN
>>> Provides balancing for exclusive wakeups when attaching multiple epoll
>>> fds to a shared wakeup soruce. Depends on EPOLLEXCLUSIVE being set and
>>> must be specified with an EPOLL_CTL_ADD operation.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>> What permissions do you need on the file descriptor to do this? This
>> will be the first case where a poll-like operation has side effects,
>> and that's rather weird IMO.
>>
>
> So in the case where you have both non-exclusive and exclusive
> waiters, all of the non-exclusive waiters will continue to get woken
> up. However, I think you're getting at having multiple exclusive
> waiters and potentially 'starving' out other exclusive waiters.
>
> In general, I think wait queues are associated with a 'struct file',
> so I think unless you are sharing your fd table, this isn't an issue.
> However, there may be cases where this is not true? In which
> case, perhaps, we could limit this to CAP_SYS_ADMIN...
There's also SCM_RIGHTS, which can be used in conjunction with file
sealing and such.
In general, I feel like this patch series solves a problem that isn't
well understood and does it by adding a rather strange new mechanism.
Is there really a problem that can't be addressed by more normal epoll
features?
--Andy
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Jason
>
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
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