From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] revert "Optimize sys_times for a single thread process"
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:33:16 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43FCE6AC.ED8BC108@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
This patch reverts 'CONFIG_SMP && thread_group_empty()'
optimization in sys_times(). The reason is that the next
patch breaks memory ordering which is needed for that
optimization.
tasklist_lock in sys_times() will be eliminated completely
by further patch.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
--- 2.6.16-rc3/kernel/exit.c~2_REVERT 2006-02-23 00:32:46.000000000 +0300
+++ 2.6.16-rc3/kernel/exit.c 2006-02-23 00:54:28.000000000 +0300
@@ -137,11 +137,7 @@ repeat:
ptrace_unlink(p);
BUG_ON(!list_empty(&p->ptrace_list) || !list_empty(&p->ptrace_children));
__exit_signal(p);
- /*
- * Note that the fastpath in sys_times depends on __exit_signal having
- * updated the counters before a task is removed from the tasklist of
- * the process by __unhash_process.
- */
+
__unhash_process(p);
/*
--- 2.6.16-rc3/kernel/sys.c~2_REVERT 2006-02-13 21:47:19.000000000 +0300
+++ 2.6.16-rc3/kernel/sys.c 2006-02-23 00:55:56.000000000 +0300
@@ -1009,69 +1009,35 @@ asmlinkage long sys_times(struct tms __u
*/
if (tbuf) {
struct tms tmp;
+ struct task_struct *tsk = current;
+ struct task_struct *t;
cputime_t utime, stime, cutime, cstime;
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
- if (thread_group_empty(current)) {
- /*
- * Single thread case without the use of any locks.
- *
- * We may race with release_task if two threads are
- * executing. However, release task first adds up the
- * counters (__exit_signal) before removing the task
- * from the process tasklist (__unhash_process).
- * __exit_signal also acquires and releases the
- * siglock which results in the proper memory ordering
- * so that the list modifications are always visible
- * after the counters have been updated.
- *
- * If the counters have been updated by the second thread
- * but the thread has not yet been removed from the list
- * then the other branch will be executing which will
- * block on tasklist_lock until the exit handling of the
- * other task is finished.
- *
- * This also implies that the sighand->siglock cannot
- * be held by another processor. So we can also
- * skip acquiring that lock.
- */
- utime = cputime_add(current->signal->utime, current->utime);
- stime = cputime_add(current->signal->utime, current->stime);
- cutime = current->signal->cutime;
- cstime = current->signal->cstime;
- } else
-#endif
- {
-
- /* Process with multiple threads */
- struct task_struct *tsk = current;
- struct task_struct *t;
+ read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ utime = tsk->signal->utime;
+ stime = tsk->signal->stime;
+ t = tsk;
+ do {
+ utime = cputime_add(utime, t->utime);
+ stime = cputime_add(stime, t->stime);
+ t = next_thread(t);
+ } while (t != tsk);
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
- utime = tsk->signal->utime;
- stime = tsk->signal->stime;
- t = tsk;
- do {
- utime = cputime_add(utime, t->utime);
- stime = cputime_add(stime, t->stime);
- t = next_thread(t);
- } while (t != tsk);
+ /*
+ * While we have tasklist_lock read-locked, no dying thread
+ * can be updating current->signal->[us]time. Instead,
+ * we got their counts included in the live thread loop.
+ * However, another thread can come in right now and
+ * do a wait call that updates current->signal->c[us]time.
+ * To make sure we always see that pair updated atomically,
+ * we take the siglock around fetching them.
+ */
+ spin_lock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
+ cutime = tsk->signal->cutime;
+ cstime = tsk->signal->cstime;
+ spin_unlock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
+ read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
- /*
- * While we have tasklist_lock read-locked, no dying thread
- * can be updating current->signal->[us]time. Instead,
- * we got their counts included in the live thread loop.
- * However, another thread can come in right now and
- * do a wait call that updates current->signal->c[us]time.
- * To make sure we always see that pair updated atomically,
- * we take the siglock around fetching them.
- */
- spin_lock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
- cutime = tsk->signal->cutime;
- cstime = tsk->signal->cstime;
- spin_unlock_irq(&tsk->sighand->siglock);
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
- }
tmp.tms_utime = cputime_to_clock_t(utime);
tmp.tms_stime = cputime_to_clock_t(stime);
tmp.tms_cutime = cputime_to_clock_t(cutime);
next reply other threads:[~2006-02-22 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-22 22:33 Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2006-02-22 22:47 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-02-22 23:10 ` [PATCH 2/3] revert "Optimize sys_times for a single threadprocess" Oleg Nesterov
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=43FCE6AC.ED8BC108@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
/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®