mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Collapsing RT signals ...
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 18:03:12 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <XFMail.20010624180312.davidel@xmailserver.org> (raw)


I'm making some test with RT signals and looking at how they're implemented
inside the kernel.
After having experienced frequent queue overflow signals I looked at how
signals are queued inside the task_struct.
There's no signals optimization inside and this make the queue length depending
on the request rate instead of the number of connections.
It can happen that two ( or more ) POLL_IN signals are queued with a single
read() that sweep the buffer leaving other signals to issue reads ( read this
as user-mode / kernel-mode switch ) that will fail due lack of data.
So for every "superfluous" signal we'll have two user-mode / kernel-mode
switches, one for signal delivery and one for a failing read().
I'm just thinking at a way to optimize the signal delivery that is ( draft ) :


struct sigqueue {
        struct sigqueue *next;
        struct sigqueue **fsig;
        siginfo_t info;
};


struct fown_struct {
        int pid;                /* pid or -pgrp where SIGIO should be sent */
        uid_t uid, euid;        /* uid/euid of process setting the owner */
        int signum;             /* posix.1b rt signal to be delivered on IO */
        struct sigqueue *sig_hint;
};



At the end we'll have ( where fsig = &file->fown.sig_hint ) :


static int send_signal_hint(int sig, struct siginfo *info,
        struct sigpending *signals, struct sigqueue **fsig) {

        if (*fsig != NULL)
                merge_info(&(*fsig)->info, info);
        else {
                *fsig = allog_sig_queue();

                (*fsig)->fsig = fsig;

                copy_info(&(*fsig)->info, info);

                ...
                add-to-queue();
                ...
        }

        ...

}


When the message is delivered we'll have :

void clean_sig_hint(struct sigqueue *qsig) {

        if (qsig->fsig != NULL) {
                *(qsig->fsig) = NULL;
                qsig->fsig = NULL;
        }

}


When the file is closed :

void clean_fown_sighint(struct fown_struct *fown) {

        if (fown->sig_hint != NULL) {
                fown->sig_hint->fsig = NULL;
                fown->sig_hint = NULL;
        }

}


All these ops must be done under  sigmask_lock  lock ( send_signal() and signal
dequeue already does ).
This will make multiple signal from the same file to be stocked inside the same
slot reducing the RT signal traffic.

Comments ?






- Davide


             reply	other threads:[~2001-06-25  1:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-06-25  1:03 Davide Libenzi [this message]
2001-06-25  4:21 Dan Kegel
2001-06-25 15:30 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-06-25 15:43 ` Davide Libenzi

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=XFMail.20010624180312.davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --to=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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®