lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 21 Mar 2008 13:45:23 +0100
FromNadia Derbey <>
SubjectRe: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc (was: ipc: store ipcs into IDRs)
Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi all,> > I noticed that sysv ipc now uses very special locking: first a global 
> rw-semaphore, then within that semaphore rcu:>  > linux-2.6.25-rc3:/ipc/util.c:> >> struct kern_ipc_perm *ipc_lock(struct ipc_ids *ids, int id)
>> {>>         struct kern_ipc_perm *out;
>>         int lid = ipcid_to_idx(id);
>>
>>         down_read(&ids->rw_mutex);
>>
>>         rcu_read_lock();
>>         out = idr_find(&ids->ipcs_idr, lid);> > ids->rw_mutex is a per-namespace (i.e.: usually global) semaphore. Thus 
> ipc_lock writes into a global cacheline. Everything else is based on 
> per-object locking, especially sysv sem doesn't contain a single global 
> lock/statistic counter/...> That can't be the Right Thing (tm): Either there are cases where we need 
> the scalability (then using IDRs is impossible), or the scalability is 
> never needed (then the remaining parts from RCU should be removed).
> I don't have a suitable test setup, has anyone performed benchmarks 
> recently?> Is sysv semaphore still important, or have all apps moved to posix 
> semaphores/futexes?> Nadia: Do you have access to a suitable benchmark?> > A microbenchmark on a single-cpu system doesn't help much (except that 
> 2.6.25 is around factor 2 slower for sysv msg ping-pong between two 
> tasks compared to the numbers I remember from older kernels....)
> 

If I remember well, at that time I had used ctxbench and I wrote some 
other small scripts.
And the results I had were around 2 or 3% slowdown, but I have to 
confirm that by checking in my archives.

I'll also have a look at the remaining RCU critical sections in the code.

Regards,
Nadia




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-21 13:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2008