lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] mm/slab: allocation fastpath without disabling irq
On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote:

> index 449fc6b..54656f0 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.c
> +++ b/mm/slab.c
> @@ -168,6 +168,41 @@ typedef unsigned short freelist_idx_t;
>
> #define SLAB_OBJ_MAX_NUM ((1 << sizeof(freelist_idx_t) * BITS_PER_BYTE) - 1)
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
> +/*
> + * Calculate the next globally unique transaction for disambiguiation
> + * during cmpxchg. The transactions start with the cpu number and are then
> + * incremented by CONFIG_NR_CPUS.
> + */
> +#define TID_STEP roundup_pow_of_two(CONFIG_NR_CPUS)
> +#else
> +/*
> + * No preemption supported therefore also no need to check for
> + * different cpus.
> + */
> +#define TID_STEP 1
> +#endif
> +
> +static inline unsigned long next_tid(unsigned long tid)
> +{
> + return tid + TID_STEP;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int tid_to_cpu(unsigned long tid)
> +{
> + return tid % TID_STEP;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long tid_to_event(unsigned long tid)
> +{
> + return tid / TID_STEP;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int init_tid(int cpu)
> +{
> + return cpu;
> +}
> +

Ok the above stuff needs to go into the common code. Maybe in mm/slab.h?
And its a significant feature contributed by me so I'd like to have an
attribution here.

> /*
> * true if a page was allocated from pfmemalloc reserves for network-based
> * swap
> @@ -187,7 +222,8 @@ static bool pfmemalloc_active __read_mostly;
> *
> */
> struct array_cache {
> - unsigned int avail;
> + unsigned long avail;
> + unsigned long tid;
> unsigned int limit;
> unsigned int batchcount;
> unsigned int touched;
> @@ -657,7 +693,8 @@ static void start_cpu_timer(int cpu)
> }
> }

This increases the per cpu struct size and should lead to a small
performance penalty.

> - */
> - if (likely(objp)) {
> - STATS_INC_ALLOCHIT(cachep);
> - goto out;
> + objp = ac->entry[avail - 1];
> + if (unlikely(!this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(
> + cachep->cpu_cache->avail, cachep->cpu_cache->tid,
> + avail, tid,
> + avail - 1, next_tid(tid))))
> + goto redo;


Hmm... Ok that looks good.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-01-05 16:41    [W:0.141 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site