Re: [patch v2 0/5] percpu_counter: bug fix and enhancement

From: Tejun Heo
Date: Wed May 11 2011 - 12:57:45 EST


Hey, Shaohua.

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:10:12PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> The new implementation uses lglock to protect percpu data. Each cpu has its
> private lock while other cpu doesn't take. In this way _add doesn't need take
> global lock anymore and remove the deviation. This still gives me about
> about 5x ~ 6x faster (not that faster than the original 7x faster, but still
> good) with the workload mentioned in patch 4.

I'm afraid I'm not too thrilled about lglock + atomic64 usage. It is
a very patchy approach which addresses a very specific use case which
might just need a higher @batch. I just can't see enough benefits to
justify the overhead and complexity. :-(

Thanks.

--
tejun
--
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/