[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250203142743.GI7145@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 15:27:43 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 03/15] futex: Add basic infrastructure for local task
local hash.
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 02:59:23PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> The futex hashmap is system wide and shared by random tasks. Each slot
> is hashed based on its address and VMA. Due to randomized VMAs (and
> memory allocations) the same logical lock (pointer) can end up in a
> different hash bucket on each invocation of the application. This in
> turn means that different applications may share a hash bucket on the
> first invocation but not on the second an it is not always clear which
> applications will be involved. This can result in high latency's to
> acquire the futex_hash_bucket::lock especially if the lock owner is
> limited to a CPU and not be effectively PI boosted.
>
> Introduce a task local hash map. The hashmap can be allocated via
> prctl(PR_FUTEX_HASH, PR_FUTEX_HASH_SET_SLOTS, 0)
>
> The `0' argument allocates a default number of 16 slots, a higher number
> can be specified if desired. The current upper limit is 131072.
Hmm, I would expect 0 to disable the local thing.
Now, I realize this is somewhat tricky, since there might be futexes
inside it. But mapping 0 to some default value seems.. well, odd.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists