[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070208.145632.74749802.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 14:56:32 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: dada1@...mosbay.com
Cc: linux@...izon.com, akepner@....com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET : change layout of ehash table
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 11:59:34 +0100
> ehash table layout is currently this one :
>
> First half of this table is used by sockets not in TIME_WAIT state
> Second half of it is used by sockets in TIME_WAIT state.
>
> This is non optimal because of for a given hash or socket, the two chain heads
> are located in separate cache lines.
> Moreover the locks of the second half are never used.
>
> If instead of this halving, we use two list heads in inet_ehash_bucket instead
> of only one, we probably can avoid one cache miss, and reduce ram usage,
> particularly if sizeof(rwlock_t) is big (various CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK,
> CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC settings). So we still halves the table but we keep
> together related chains to speedup lookups and socket state change.
>
> In this patch I did not try to align struct inet_ehash_bucket, but a future
> patch could try to make this structure have a convenient size (a power of two
> or a multiple of L1_CACHE_SIZE).
> I guess rwlock will just vanish as soon as RCU is plugged into ehash :) , so
> maybe we dont need to scratch our heads to align the bucket...
>
> Note : In case struct inet_ehash_bucket is not a power of two, we could
> probably change alloc_large_system_hash() (in case it use __get_free_pages())
> to free the unused space. It currently allocates a big zone, but the last
> quarter of it could be freed. Again, this should be a temporary 'problem'.
>
> Patch tested on ipv4 tcp only, but should be OK for IPV6 and DCCP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
I've applied this, but I _REALLY_ don't like the new multiply
instructions that are used now in the hash indexing paths when
CONFIG_SMP is set.
I think that's a higher cost than the memory waste.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists