[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aAesultdR77oRaSI@pathway.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 16:50:34 +0200
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Jon Pan-Doh <pandoh@...gle.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Karolina Stolarek <karolina.stolarek@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/9] Reduce ratelimit's false-positive misses
On Fri 2025-04-18 10:13:49, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> This v2 series replaces open-coded uses of the ratelimit_state structure
> with formal APIs, counts all rate-limit misses, replaces jiffies=0 special
> case with a flag, provides a ___ratelimit() trylock-failure fastpath
> to (almost) eliminate false-positive misses, and adds a simple test.
>
> The key point of this series is the reduction of false-positive misses.
>
> The individual patches are as follows:
>
> 1. Add trivial kunit test for ratelimit.
I have suggested few cosmetic changes for the above patch.
> 2. Create functions to handle ratelimit_state internals.
>
> 3. Avoid open-coded use of ratelimit_state structure's ->missed
> field.
>
> 4. Avoid open-coded use of ratelimit_state structure's ->missed
> field.
>
> 5. Avoid open-coded use of ratelimit_state structure's internals.
>
> 6. Convert the ->missed field to atomic_t.
>
> 7. Count misses due to lock contention.
>
> 8. Avoid jiffies=0 special case.
>
> 9. Reduce ___ratelimit() false-positive rate limiting, courtesy of
> Petr Mladek.
>
> 10. Allow zero ->burst to disable ratelimiting.
>
> 11. Force re-initialization when rate-limiting re-enabled.
>
> 12. Don't flush misses counter if RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE.
>
> 13. Avoid atomic decrement if already rate-limited.
>
> 14. Avoid atomic decrement under lock if already rate-limited.
The rest looks good. And I think that it is a great improvement.
Feel free to use for the entire patchset:
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists