Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2008 07:18:54 +0200 | From | Nadia Derbey <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc |
| |
Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 18:17 +0200, Nadia.Derbey@bull.net wrote: > >>Here is finally the ipc ridr-based implementation I was talking about last >>week (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/4/208). >>I couldn't avoid much of the code duplication, but at least made things >>incremental. >> >>Does somebody now a test suite that exists for the idr API, that I could >>run on this new api? >> >>Mike, can you try to run it on your victim: I had such a hard time building >>this patch, that I couldn't re-run the test on my 8-core with this new >>version. So the last results I have are for 2.6.25-rc3-mm1. >> >>Also, I think a careful review should be done to avoid introducing yet other >>problems :-( > > > Why duplicate the whole thing, when we converted the Radix tree to be > RCU safe we did it in-place. Is there a reason this is not done for idr? > > >
I did that because I wanted to go fast and try to fix the performance problem we have with sysV ipc's. I didn't want to introduce (yet other) regressions in the code that uses idr's today and that works well ;-) May be in the future if this rcu based api appears to be ok, we can replace one with the other?
Regards, Nadia
| |