From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC v3 2/2] epoll: use a local wfcq functions for Level Trigger
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:54:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130321115447.GB17883@dcvr.yhbt.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130321115259.GA17883@dcvr.yhbt.net>
Using Davide's epwbench to test, this mostly fixes a performance
regression with level trigger in a single-threaded workload.
Single-threaded level trigger is probably the most common method
of using epoll, so performance is important.
Before (without wfcq at all):
AVG: 5.448400
SIG: 0.003056
Before (with wfcq):
AVG: 7.735375
SIG: 0.000064
Currently (with wfcq local):
AVG: 5.532024
SIG: 0.000244
The margin of error for my tests is pretty high under KVM. I'm getting
wildly varying (~0.10s) differences between runs on the same boot,
However the difference between using plain wfcq and these new _local
functions is large and outside of the margin of error.
ref: http://www.xmailserver.org/epwbench.c
Somewhat-tested-by: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
fs/eventpoll.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
index e039555..1e04175 100644
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c
+++ b/fs/eventpoll.c
@@ -1356,7 +1356,7 @@ static int ep_modify(struct eventpoll *ep, struct epitem *epi, struct epoll_even
return 0;
}
-static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
+static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep, bool *eavail,
struct epoll_event __user *uevent, int maxevents)
{
int eventcnt = 0;
@@ -1366,7 +1366,10 @@ static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
struct wfcq_node *node, *n;
enum epoll_item_state state;
poll_table pt;
+ struct wfcq_head lthead;
+ struct wfcq_tail lttail;
+ wfcq_init(<head, <tail);
init_poll_funcptr(&pt, NULL);
/*
@@ -1414,7 +1417,7 @@ static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
if (revents) {
if (__put_user(revents, &uevent->events) ||
__put_user(epi->event.data, &uevent->data)) {
- wfcq_enqueue(&ep->txlhead, &ep->txltail,
+ wfcq_enqueue_local(&ep->txlhead, &ep->txltail,
&epi->rdllink);
ep_pm_stay_awake(epi);
if (!eventcnt)
@@ -1436,7 +1439,7 @@ static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
* epoll_wait() will check again the events
* availability.
*/
- wfcq_enqueue(&ep->rdlhead, &ep->rdltail,
+ wfcq_enqueue_local(<head, <tail,
&epi->rdllink);
ep_pm_stay_awake(epi);
continue;
@@ -1450,6 +1453,14 @@ static int ep_send_events(struct eventpoll *ep,
epi->state = EP_STATE_IDLE;
}
+ /* grab any events we got while copying */
+ *eavail = ep_events_available(ep);
+
+ /* requeue level-triggered items */
+ if (__wfcq_splice(&ep->txlhead, &ep->txltail, <head, <tail)
+ != WFCQ_RET_SRC_EMPTY)
+ *eavail = true;
+
return eventcnt;
}
@@ -1550,12 +1561,11 @@ wait_queue_loop:
* more luck.
*/
if (!res) {
- res = ep_send_events(ep, events, maxevents);
+ res = ep_send_events(ep, &eavail, events, maxevents);
if (!res && timeout)
goto wait_queue_loop;
}
- eavail = ep_events_available(ep);
mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);
/* we may not have transferred everything, wake up others */
--
Eric Wong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-21 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-21 11:52 [RFC v3 1/2] epoll: avoid spinlock contention with wfcqueue Eric Wong
2013-03-21 11:54 ` Eric Wong [this message]
2013-03-21 12:01 ` Eric Wong
2013-03-22 1:39 ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2013-03-22 3:24 ` Eric Wong
2013-03-22 4:07 ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2013-03-22 10:31 ` Eric Wong
2013-03-22 19:24 ` Eric Wong
2013-03-22 22:27 ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2013-03-22 22:18 ` Arve Hjønnevåg
2013-03-22 22:54 ` Eric Wong
2013-03-23 10:16 ` Eric Wong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130321115447.GB17883@dcvr.yhbt.net \
--to=normalperson@yhbt.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®