lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 11/11] locks: give the blocked_hash its own spinlock
    Hi Jeff,

    > There's no reason we have to protect the blocked_hash and file_lock_list
    > with the same spinlock. With the tests I have, breaking it in two gives
    > a barely measurable performance benefit, but it seems reasonable to make
    > this locking as granular as possible.

    as file_lock_{list,lock} is only used for debugging (/proc/locks) after this
    change, I guess it would be possible to use RCU instead of a spinlock.

    @others: this was the related discussion on IRC
    (http://irclog.samba.org/) about this:

    16:02 < metze> jlayton: do you have time to discuss your file_lock_lock
    changes?
    16:02 < jlayton> metze: sure, what's up?
    16:03 < jlayton> metze: note that it won't help vl's thundering herd
    problems...
    16:03 < metze> is it correct that after your last patch file_lock_lock
    is only used for /proc/locks?
    16:03 < jlayton> well, it's only used to protect the list that is used
    for /proc/locks
    16:04 < jlayton> it still gets taken whenever a lock is acquired or
    released in order to manipulate that list
    16:04 < metze> would it be a good idea to use rcu instead of a spin lock?
    16:04 < jlayton> I tried using RCU, but it turned out to slow everything
    down
    16:04 < jlayton> this is not a read-mostly workload unfortunately
    16:04 < jlayton> so doing it with mutual exclusion turns out to be faster
    16:04 < metze> ok
    16:05 < jlayton> I might play around with it again sometime, but I don't
    think it really helps. What we need to ensure is
    that we optimize the code that manipulates that list,
    and RCU list manipulations have larger overhead
    16:06 < jlayton> metze: that's a good question though so if you want to
    ask it on the list, please do
    16:06 < jlayton> others will probably be wondering the same thing
    16:08 < metze> maybe it's worth a comment in commit message and the code
    16:08 < metze> btw, why don't you remove the ' /* Protects the
    file_lock_list and the blocked_hash */' comment?

    metze

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-06-04 20:41    [W:2.529 / U:1.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site