lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Kernel RCU: shrink the size of the struct rcu_head
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 07:29:18PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I noticed that you already discussed the possibility of shrinking the
> struct rcu_head by removing the function pointer.
> (http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html)
>
> The ideas brought in so far require having per-callback lists, which
> involves a bit of management overhead and don't permit keeping the
> call_rcu() in cpu order.

But please note that this is on the "Possibly Dubious Changes" list. ;-)

> You might want to look into the Userspace RCU urcu-defer.c
> implementation, where I perform pointer encoding to compact the usual
> case, expected to be the same callback passed as parameter multiple
> times in a row to call_rcu(). This is very typical with multiple free()
> calls for different data structures next to each other.
>
> This typically keeps the size of the information to encode per callback
> down to a minimum: the size of a single pointer. It would be good to
> trace the kernel usage of call_rcu() to see if my assumption holds.
>
> I just thought I should tell you before you start looking at this
> issue further.

So the idea is to maintain a per-CPU queue of function pointers, but
with the pointers on this queue encoded to save space, correct? If I
understand correctly, the user-level rcu-defer implementation relies on
the following:

1. It is illegal to call _rcu_defer_queue() within an RCU read-side
critical section (due to the call to rcu_defer_barrier_thread()
which in turn calls synchronize_rcu(). This is necessary to
handle queue overflow. (Which appears to be why you introduce
a new API, as it is legal to invoke call_rcu() from within an
RCU read-side critical section.)

2. It is OK to wait for a grace period when a thread calls
rcu_defer_unregister_thread() while exiting. In the kernel,
this is roughly equivalent to the CPU_DYING notifier, which
cannot block, thus cannot wait for a grace period.

I could imagine copying the per-CPU buffer somewhere, though
my experience with the RCU/CPU-hotplug interface does not
encourage me in this direction. ;-)

Thanx, Paul


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-21 00:09    [W:0.057 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site