Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

[Nadia Derbey]

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 18:17 +0200, Nadia.Derbey@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Here is finally the ipc ridr-based implementation I was talking about last
> > week (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/4/208).
> > I couldn't avoid much of the code duplication, but at least made things
> > incremental.
> >
> > Does somebody now a test suite that exists for the idr API, that I could
> > run on this new api?
> >
> > Mike, can you try to run it on your victim: I had such a hard time building
> > this patch, that I couldn't re-run the test on my 8-core with this new
> > version. So the last results I have are for 2.6.25-rc3-mm1.
> >
> > Also, I think a careful review should be done to avoid introducing yet other
> > problems :-(
>
>
> Why duplicate the whole thing, when we converted the Radix tree to be
> RCU safe we did it in-place. Is there a reason this is not done for idr?

I did that because I wanted to go fast and try to fix the performance 
problem we have with sysV ipc's. I didn't want to introduce (yet other) 
regressions in the code that uses idr's today and that works well ;-)
May be in the future if this rcu based api appears to be ok, we can 
replace one with the other?

Regards,
Nadia



--
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/