Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/3] ptr_ring: move r->queue[] clearing after r->consumer_head updating | From | Jason Wang <> | Date | Fri, 2 Jul 2021 14:45:53 +0800 |
| |
在 2021/7/1 下午8:26, Yunsheng Lin 写道: > Currently r->queue[] clearing is done before r->consumer_head > updating, which makes the __ptr_ring_empty() returning false > positive result(the ring is non-empty, but __ptr_ring_empty() > suggest that it is empty) if the checking is done after the > r->queue clearing and before the consumer_head moving forward. > > Move the r->queue[] clearing after consumer_head moving forward > to avoid the above case. > > As a side effect of above change, a consumer_head checking is > avoided for the likely case, and it has noticeable performance > improvement when it is tested using the ptr_ring_test selftest > added in the previous patch. > > Tested using the "perf stat -r 1000 ./ptr_ring_test -s 1000 -m 1 > -N 100000000", comparing the elapsed time: > > arch unpatched patched improvement > arm64 2.087205 sec 1.888224 sec +9.5% > X86 2.6538 sec 2.5422 sec +4.2%
I think we need the number of real workloads here.
Thanks
> > Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com> > --- > V3: adjust the title and comment log according to disscusion in > V2, and update performance data using "perf stat -r". > V2: Add performance data. > --- > include/linux/ptr_ring.h | 25 ++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h > index 808f9d3..db9c282 100644 > --- a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h > +++ b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h > @@ -261,8 +261,7 @@ static inline void __ptr_ring_discard_one(struct ptr_ring *r) > /* Note: we must keep consumer_head valid at all times for __ptr_ring_empty > * to work correctly. > */ > - int consumer_head = r->consumer_head; > - int head = consumer_head++; > + int consumer_head = r->consumer_head + 1; > > /* Once we have processed enough entries invalidate them in > * the ring all at once so producer can reuse their space in the ring. > @@ -271,19 +270,27 @@ static inline void __ptr_ring_discard_one(struct ptr_ring *r) > */ > if (unlikely(consumer_head - r->consumer_tail >= r->batch || > consumer_head >= r->size)) { > + int tail = r->consumer_tail; > + > + if (unlikely(consumer_head >= r->size)) { > + r->consumer_tail = 0; > + WRITE_ONCE(r->consumer_head, 0); > + } else { > + r->consumer_tail = consumer_head; > + WRITE_ONCE(r->consumer_head, consumer_head); > + } > + > /* Zero out entries in the reverse order: this way we touch the > * cache line that producer might currently be reading the last; > * producer won't make progress and touch other cache lines > * besides the first one until we write out all entries. > */ > - while (likely(head >= r->consumer_tail)) > - r->queue[head--] = NULL; > - r->consumer_tail = consumer_head; > - } > - if (unlikely(consumer_head >= r->size)) { > - consumer_head = 0; > - r->consumer_tail = 0; > + while (likely(--consumer_head >= tail)) > + r->queue[consumer_head] = NULL; > + > + return; > } > + > /* matching READ_ONCE in __ptr_ring_empty for lockless tests */ > WRITE_ONCE(r->consumer_head, consumer_head); > }
| |