mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, famz@redhat.com, nzimmer@sgi.com,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, davidel@xmailserver.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] epoll: introduce epoll connected components (remove the epmutex)
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 23:10:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150115231051.GA24252@dcvr.yhbt.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f0053e978dfddd6fa9a5c72c69d9353d219fc4b9.1421337657.git.jbaron@akamai.com>

Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> wrote:
> I've done a bit of performance evaluation on a dual socket, 10 core, hyper
> threading enabled box: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650 v3 @ 2.30GHz. For the
> simple epfdN->epfdN->pipefdN topology case where each thread has its
> own unique files and is doing EPOLL_CTL_ADD and EPOLL_CTL_DEL on the pipefd,
> I see an almost 300% improvement. This is obviously a very contrived case,
> but shows the motivation for this patch.

Any improvements for non-contrived cases? :)

> +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> @@ -835,6 +835,9 @@ struct file {
>  	/* Used by fs/eventpoll.c to link all the hooks to this file */
>  	struct list_head	f_ep_links;
>  	struct list_head	f_tfile_llink;
> +	/* connected component */
> +	struct list_head	f_ep_cc_link;
> +	struct ep_cc __rcu	*f_ep_cc;
>  #endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_EPOLL */

This size increase worries me.  Perhaps this can be a separately
allocated struct to avoid penalizing non-epoll users?

	struct file_eventpoll {
		struct list_head	f_ep_links;
		struct list_head	f_tfile_llink;
		/* connected component */
		struct list_head	f_ep_cc_link;
		struct ep_cc __rcu	*f_ep_cc;
	};

But I wish Linux never allowed nesting epoll in the first place :/

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-15 23:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-15 21:02 [RFC PATCH 0/5] Remove global locks from epoll Jason Baron
2015-01-15 21:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] epoll: remove ep_call_nested() from ep_eventpoll_poll() Jason Baron
2015-01-15 21:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] epoll: remove ep_call_nested() from ep_poll_safewake() Jason Baron
2015-01-15 21:02 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] epoll: add ep_call_nested_nolock() Jason Baron
2015-01-15 21:02 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] epoll: Allow topology checks to be parallelized Jason Baron
2015-01-15 21:02 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] epoll: introduce epoll connected components (remove the epmutex) Jason Baron
2015-01-15 23:10   ` Eric Wong [this message]
2015-01-16 17:03     ` Jason Baron
2015-01-16  1:36 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] Remove global locks from epoll Fam Zheng

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=20150115231051.GA24252@dcvr.yhbt.net \
    --to=normalperson@yhbt.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=famz@redhat.com \
    --cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nzimmer@sgi.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --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®