From: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [patch 1/2] cpuacct: refactoring cpuusage_read / cpuusage_write
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:02:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b040c32a0812152202y4914ba88gbf0c9137d50a296a@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In the thread regarding to 'export percpu cpuacct cgroup stats'
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/7/13
akpm pointed out that current cpuacct code is inefficient. This patch
refactoring the following:
* make cpu_rq locking only on 32-bit
* change iterator to each_present_cpu instead of each_possible_cpu to
make it hotplug friendly.
It's a bit of code churn, but I was rewarded with 160 byte code size saving
on x86-64 arch and zero code size change on i386.
Signed-off-by: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index e4bb1dd..124bd7a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -9302,6 +9302,41 @@ cpuacct_destroy
kfree(ca);
}
+static u64 cpuacct_cpuusage_read(struct cpuacct *ca, int cpu)
+{
+ u64 *cpuusage = percpu_ptr(ca->cpuusage, cpu);
+ u64 data;
+
+#ifndef CONFIG_64BIT
+ /*
+ * Take rq->lock to make 64-bit read safe on 32-bit platforms.
+ */
+ spin_lock_irq(&cpu_rq(cpu)->lock);
+ data = *cpuusage;
+ spin_unlock_irq(&cpu_rq(cpu)->lock);
+#else
+ data = *cpuusage;
+#endif
+
+ return data;
+}
+
+static void cpuacct_cpuusage_write(struct cpuacct *ca, int cpu, u64 val)
+{
+ u64 *cpuusage = percpu_ptr(ca->cpuusage, cpu);
+
+#ifndef CONFIG_64BIT
+ /*
+ * Take rq->lock to make 64-bit write safe on 32-bit platforms.
+ */
+ spin_lock_irq(&cpu_rq(cpu)->lock);
+ *cpuusage = val;
+ spin_unlock_irq(&cpu_rq(cpu)->lock);
+#else
+ *cpuusage = val;
+#endif
+}
+
/* return total cpu usage (in nanoseconds) of a group */
static u64 cpuusage_read(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cftype *cft)
{
@@ -9309,17 +9344,8 @@ static u64 cpuusage_read
u64 totalcpuusage = 0;
int i;
- for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
- u64 *cpuusage = percpu_ptr(ca->cpuusage, i);
-
- /*
- * Take rq->lock to make 64-bit addition safe on 32-bit
- * platforms.
- */
- spin_lock_irq(&cpu_rq(i)->lock);
- totalcpuusage += *cpuusage;
- spin_unlock_irq(&cpu_rq(i)->lock);
- }
+ for_each_present_cpu(i)
+ totalcpuusage += cpuacct_cpuusage_read(ca, i);
return totalcpuusage;
}
@@ -9336,13 +9362,9 @@ static int cpuusage_write
goto out;
}
- for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
- u64 *cpuusage = percpu_ptr(ca->cpuusage, i);
+ for_each_present_cpu(i)
+ cpuacct_cpuusage_write(ca, i, 0);
- spin_lock_irq(&cpu_rq(i)->lock);
- *cpuusage = 0;
- spin_unlock_irq(&cpu_rq(i)->lock);
- }
out:
return err;
}
next reply other threads:[~2008-12-16 6:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-16 6:02 Ken Chen [this message]
2008-12-16 11:15 ` Ingo Molnar
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=b040c32a0812152202y4914ba88gbf0c9137d50a296a@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kenchen@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®