[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180507134731.GA28974@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 06:47:31 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
Nicholas Bellinger <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu_ida: Use _irqsave() instead of local_irq_save() +
spin_lock
On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 08:52:02AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> init and destroy seem to map to sbitmap_queue_init_node and
> sbitmap_queue_free. percpu_ida_free maps to sbitmap_queue_clear.
Hmm.
void sbitmap_queue_clear(struct sbitmap_queue *sbq, unsigned int nr,
unsigned int cpu)
{
sbitmap_clear_bit_unlock(&sbq->sb, nr);
sbq_wake_up(sbq);
if (likely(!sbq->round_robin && nr < sbq->sb.depth))
*per_cpu_ptr(sbq->alloc_hint, cpu) = nr;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sbitmap_queue_clear);
If we free a tag on a CPU other than the one it's allocated on, that seems
like it's going to guarantee a cacheline pingpong. Is the alloc_hint
really that valuable? I'd be tempted to maintain the alloc_hint (if it's
at all valuable) as being just a hint for which word to look at first,
and only update it on allocation, rather than updating it on free.
Then we can drop the 'cpu' argument to sbitmap_queue_clear(), which
would help this conversion because the percpu_ida users don't know what
CPU their tag was allocated on.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists