Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Jun 2006 15:35:55 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.17 radix-tree: updates and lockless |
| |
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: > > I've finally ported the RCU radix tree over my radix tree direct-data patch > (the latter patch has been in -mm for a while now).
Yes, radix-tree-direct-data.patch and radix-tree-small.patch are for-2.6.18.
> I've also done the last step required for submission, which was to make a > small userspace RCU test harness, and wire up the rtth so that it can handle > multiple threads to test the lockless capability. The RCU test harness uses > an implementation somewhat like Paul's paper's quiescent state bitmask > approach; with infrequent quiescent state updates, performance isn't bad. > > This quickly flushed out several obscure bugs just when running on my dual > G5. After fixing those, I racked up about 100 CPU hours of testing on > SUSE's 64-way Altix without problem. Also passes the normal battery of > single threaded rtth tests. > > I'd like to hear views regarding merging these patches for 2.6.18. Initially > the lockless code would not come into effect (good - one thing at a time) > until tree_lock can start getting lifted in -mm and 2.6.19.
For 2.6.18 we obviously need to fix the tree_lock box-killer as #1 priority. And whatever we do there needs to be backportable to 2.6.17. Depending upon Dave's testing results that'll be either covert-to-spinlock or disable-rwlock-debugging-if-CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK. Or something else. We'll see.
So given those complexities, and the lack of a _user_ of radix-tree-rcu-lockless-readside.patch, it doesn't look like 2.6.18 stuff at this time.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |