Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2007 07:30:27 +1000
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 13:40 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
This patch trades a page flag for a significant improvement in the unlock_page
fastpath. Various problems in the previous version were spotted by Hugh and
Ben (and fixed in this one).
Comments?
--
Speed up unlock_page by introducing a new page flag to signal that there are
page waitqueue waiters for PG_locked. This means a memory barrier and a random
waitqueue hash cacheline load can be avoided in the fastpath when there is no
contention.
I'm not 100% familiar with the exclusive vs. non exclusive wait thingy
but wake_up_page() does __wake_up_bit() which calls __wake_up() with
nr_exclusive set to 1. Doesn't that mean that only one waiter will be
woken up ?
If that's the case, then we lose because we'll have clear PG_waiters but
only wake up one of them.
Waking them all would fix it but at the risk of causing other
problems... Maybe PG_waiters need to actually be a counter but if that
is the case, then it complicates things even more.
Any smart idea ?
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- From: Nick Piggin
- Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- References:
- [rfc] lock bitops
- From: Nick Piggin
- [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- From: Nick Piggin
- [rfc] lock bitops
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC/PATCH] doc: volatile considered evil
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] LogFS proper
- Previous by thread: Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- Next by thread: Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading