Re: [this_cpu_xx V5 19/19] SLUB: Experimental new fastpath w/ointerrupt disable

From: Mathieu Desnoyers
Date: Wed Oct 07 2009 - 13:14:08 EST


* Christoph Lameter (cl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > preempt_check_resched is basically:
> >
> > a test TIF_NEED_RESCHED
> > if true, call to preempt_schedule
>
> You did not mention the effect of incrementing the preempt counter and
> the barrier(). Adds an additional cacheline to a very hot OS path.
> Possibly register effects.
>

What you say applies to preempt_enable(). I was describing
preempt_check_resched above, which involves no compiler barrier nor
increment whatsoever.

By the way, the barrier() you are talking about is in
preempt_enable_no_resched(), the very primitive you are considering
using to save these precious cycles.


> > I really don't see what's bothering you here. Testing a thread flag is
> > incredibly cheap. That's what is typically added to your fast path.
>
> I am trying to get rid off all unnecessary overhead. These "incredible
> cheap" tricks en masse have caused lots of regressions. And the allocator
> hotpaths are overloaded with these "incredibly cheap" checks alreayd.
>
> > So, correct behavior would be:
> >
> > preempt disable()
> > fast path attempt
> > if (fast path already taken) {
> > local_irq_save();
> > slow path.
> > local_irq_restore();
> > }
> > preempt_enable()
>
> Ok. If you have to use preempt then you have to suffer I guess..
>

Yes. A user enabling full preemption should be aware that it has a
performance footprint.

By the way, from what I remember of the slub allocator, you might find
the following more suited for your needs. I remember that the slow path
sometimes need to reenable interrupts, so:

preempt disable()
fast path attempt
if (fast path already taken) {
local_irq_save();
preempt_enable_no_resched();
slow path {
if (!flags & GFP_ATOMIC) {
local_irq_enable();
preempt_check_resched();
...
local_irq_disable();
}
}
local_irq_restore();
preempt_check_resched();
return;
}
preempt_enable()

This should work, be efficient and manage to ensure scheduler RT
correctness.

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/