[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <61a2ff76-8f5c-30e5-5645-76ca07ba77f0@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:16:49 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/6] lib/dlock-list: Enable faster lookup with hashing
On 11/01/2017 04:40 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 31-10-17 14:50:59, Waiman Long wrote:
>> Insertion and deletion is relatively cheap and mostly contention
>> free for dlock-list. Lookup, on the other hand, can be rather costly
>> because all the lists in a dlock-list will have to be iterated.
>>
>> Currently dlock-list insertion is based on the cpu that the task is
>> running on. So a given object can be inserted into any one of the
>> lists depending on what the current cpu is.
>>
>> This patch provides an alternative way of list selection. The caller
>> can provide a object context which will be hashed to one of the list
>> in a dlock-list. The object can then be added into that particular
>> list. Lookup can be done by iterating elements in the provided list
>> only instead of all the lists in a dlock-list.
>>
>> The new APIs are:
>>
>> struct dlock_list_head *dlock_list_hash(struct dlock_list_heads *, void *);
>> void dlock_list_add(struct dlock_list_node *, struct dlock_list_head *);
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
> Hum, do we have any users for this API? And wouldn't they also need to
> control how many lists are allocated then?
This patch is supposed to be used by the epoll patch from Davidlohr. As
he has retracted the patch, I can drop this patch also. The number of
lists scale with the number of CPU cores in the system whether it is
used one way or the others.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists