Re: [PATCH 2/2] epoll: introduce EPOLLEXCLUSIVE and EPOLLROUNDROBIN
From: Eric Wong
Date: Tue Feb 10 2015 - 14:32:53 EST
Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 02/09/2015 11:49 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
> > Do you have a userland use case to share?
> I've been trying to describe the use case, maybe I haven't been doing a good
> job :(
Sorry, I meant if you had any public code.
Anyways, I've restarted work on another project which I'll hopefully be
able to share in a few weeks which might be a good public candidate for
epoll performance testing.
> > Did you try my suggestion of using a dedicated thread (or thread pool)
> > which does nothing but loop on accept() + EPOLL_CTL_ADD?
> > Those dedicated threads could do its own round-robin in userland to pick
> > a different epollfd to call EPOLL_CTL_ADD on.
> Thanks for your suggestion! I'm not actively working on the user-space
> code here, but I will pass it along.
> I would prefer though not to have to context switch the 'accept' thread
> on and off the cpu every time there is a new connection. So the approach
> suggested here essentially moves this dedicated thread (threads), down
> into the kernel and avoids the creation of these threads entirely.
For cmogstored, I stopped using TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT when using the
dedicated thread. This approach offloads to epoll and ends up giving
similar behavior to what used to be infinite in TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT in
Linux <= 2.6.31
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/