[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081127.002046.25550570.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:20:46 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: dada1@...mosbay.com
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, efault@....de,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
cl@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] fs: Introduce special inodes
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:32:41 +0100
> Goal of this patch is to not touch inode_lock for socket/pipes/anonfd
> inodes allocation/freeing.
>
> In new_inode(), we test if super block has MS_SPECIAL flag set.
> If yes, we dont put inode in "inode_in_use" list nor "sb->s_inodes" list
> As inode_lock was taken only to protect these lists, we avoid it as well
>
> Using iput_special() from dput_special() avoids taking inode_lock
> at freeing time.
>
> This patch has a very noticeable effect, because we avoid dirtying of three contended cache lines in new_inode(), and five cache lines
> in iput()
>
> Note: Not sure if we can use MS_SPECIAL=MS_NOUSER, or if we
> really need a different flag.
>
> (socket8 bench result : from 20.5s to 2.94s)
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
No problem with networking part:
Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
--
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