From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] kernel/rcu: add kfree_rcu
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 13:22:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4960A9E8.3090309@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <496073AB.2030400@cn.fujitsu.com>
Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> I have not posted it. -:)
>
Could you post it?
Paul: What would break if we stop processing rcu entries in (cpu) order?
The head->func(head) in rcu_do_batch() is probably a nightmare for the
branch target predictor.
What about:
- shrinking struct rcu_head to just a pointer (let's start with the goodie)
- Adding a register_rcu_callback() function.
It allocates the per-cpu storage for the rcu grace period lists.
Seperate lists for each registered callback - thus no need to copy the
callback target into each rcu_head structure.
It returns a pointer/handle to these lists.
- call_rcu gets that handle instead of the plain function pointer.
- rcu_do_batch enumerates all registered callbacks. Thus first all
callback_struct->func(head) calls for the first registered callback,
then the calls for the 2nd callback, etc.
Better for the icache, better for the branch predictor.
Paul: Do you have a test case that is suitable for benchmarking rcu?
Any workloads were rcu appears significantly in oprofile?
And: Do you know how many rcu entries are typically alive? How much
memory is used for the function pointers?
--
Manfred
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-04 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-02 11:25 Manfred Spraul
2009-01-02 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-03 14:59 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-03 23:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-04 5:50 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 19:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 2:48 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-05 4:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-06 22:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-05 7:15 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-04 5:39 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 7:07 ` Manfred Spraul
2009-01-04 8:30 ` Lai Jiangshan
2009-01-04 12:22 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2009-01-04 20:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-12 17:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=4960A9E8.3090309@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.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
Powered by JetHome