[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160225170416.GV6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 18:04:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>, rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] getcpu_cache system call: cache CPU number of
running thread
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 04:55:26PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Feb 25, 2016, at 4:56 AM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@...radead.org wrote:
> The restartable sequences are intrinsically designed to work
> on per-cpu data, so they need to fetch the current CPU number
> within the rseq critical section. This is where the getcpu_cache
> system call becomes very useful when combined with rseq:
> getcpu_cache allows reading the current CPU number in a
> fraction of cycle.
Yes yes, I know how restartable sequences work.
But what I worry about is that they want a cpu number and a sequence
number, and for performance it would be very good if those live in the
same cacheline.
That means either getcpu needs to grow a seq number, or restartable
sequences need to _also_ provide the cpu number.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists