[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160713210114.GE29670@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:01:14 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@...gle.com>,
Rom Lemarchand <romlem@...gle.com>,
Colin Cross <ccross@...gle.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Severe performance regression w/ 4.4+ on Android due to cgroup
locking changes
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:51:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 04:39:44PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> So, IIRC, the trade-off is a full memory barrier in read_lock and
> read_unlock() vs sync_sched() in write.
>
> Full memory barriers are expensive and while the combined cost might
> well exceed the cost of the sync_sched() it doesn't suffer the latency
> issues.
Given the way read side is used for percpu_rwsem, full memory barrier
on reader side shouldn't matter at all. The paths are not *that* hot.
> Not sure if we can frob the two in a single codebase, but I can have a
> poke if Oleg or Paul doesn't beat me to it.
At the simplest, it can be rwsem equivalence of lglock.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists