[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1366889995.26911.555.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:39:55 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [net-next PATCH 0/4] net: frag patchset for fixing LRU
scalabilityissue
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 17:21 +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > I have dropped the idea of doing "direct hash cleaning". Instead I
> > have simply choosen to solve the global LRU list problem, by making
> > the LRU list be per CPU.
>
> How can a per-cpu LRU list work?
> I see two immediate problems:
> - Ensuring the normal 'allocate' and 'free' are always done
> on the same cpu (free will need to remove items from any
> LRU list).
> - Ensuring that there all the items aren't on the LRU lists
> of other cpus - meaning one can't be allocated.
>
> The only way this could work is if the allocation limit
> is also per-cpu and you can guarantee that the alloc and
> free for any given item will always happen on the same cpu.
>
> (alloc as in 'add to LRU list, free as in 'remove from LRU list).
Please read patch-04.
I've added "cpu_alloc" to record the CPU were the first fragment got
allocated. After which all frags gets accounted to that CPU,
add/remove/timeout etc.
--Jesper
--
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