Re: [take25 1/6] kevent: Description.

[Eric Dumazet]

Andrew Morton a écrit :
> On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:48:32 +0100
> Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > The alternative is the sorry state we have now.  In nscd, for instance, 
> > > we have one single thread waiting for incoming connections and it then 
> > > has to wake up a worker thread to handle the processing.  This is done 
> > > because we cannot "park" all threads in the accept() call since when a 
> > > new connection is announced _all_ the threads are woken.  With the new 
> > > event handling this wouldn't be the case, one thread only is woken and 
> > > we don't have to wake worker threads.  All threads can be worker threads.
> > Having one specialized thread handling the distribution of work to worker 
> > threads is better most of the time.
>
> It might be now.  Think "commodity 128-way".  Your single distribution thread
> will run out of steam.
>
> What Ulrich is proposing is faster.  This is a new interface.  Let's design
> it to be fast.

Hum... I guess you didnt read my mail... I basically agree with Ulrich.

I just wanted to say that a fast application cannot rely only on a "let's park 
N threads waiting for single event in this queue", and hope kernel will be 
smart for us.

Even with 128-ways, you still hit a central point of coordination (it can be a 
mutex in kevent code, a atomic uidx in userland, or whatever) for a 'kevent 
queue'. Once you paid the cache lines ping/pong, you wont be *fast*.

I wish *you* dont think of kevent of only dispatching HTTP 1.0 trivial web 
requests.

Being able to direct a particular request on a particular CPU is certainly 
something that cannot be hardcoded in 'the new kevent interface'.

Eric
-
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/