Re: [RFC PATCH] asynchronous page fault.

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-12-28 at 09:36 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> Hmm ? for single-thread apps ? This patch's purpose is not for lockless
>> lookup, it's just a part of work. My purpose is avoiding false-sharing.
>
> False sharing in the sense of the mmap_sem cacheline containing other
> variables?  How could that ever be a problem for a single threaded
> application?
>
No problem at all. I just couldn't catch what you mean.


> For multi-threaded apps the contention on that cacheline is the largest
> issue, and moving it to a vma cacheline doesn't seem like a big
> improvement.
>
I feel mmap_sem's cacheline ping-pong is more terrible than
simple atomic_inc().
__down_read() does
  write (spinlock)
  write (->sem_activity)
  write (unlock)


> You want something much finer grained than vmas, there's lots of apps
> working on a single (or very few) vma(s). Leaving you with pretty much
> the same cacheline contention. Only now its a different cacheline.
>
Ya, maybe. I hope I can find some magical one.
Using per-cpu counter here as Christoph did may be an idea...

Thanks,
-Kame



--
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/