Re: [RT LATENCY] 249 microsecond latency caused by slub'sunfreeze_partials() code.

[Joonsoo Kim]

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 02:32:35PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-25 at 18:27 +0000, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 
> > > If this makes it more deterministic, and lower worse case latencies,
> > > then it's definitely worth the price.
> > 
> > Yes that would make it more deterministic. Maybe I should add an option
> > to be able to compile the allocator without cpu partial page support?
> 
> I agree that would be useful.

Hello, Steven and Christoph.

How about using spin_try_lock() in unfreeze_partials() and
using spin_lock_contented() in get_partial_node() to reduce latency?
IMHO, this doesn't make code more deterministic, but can maintain
a benefit of cpu partial page with tolerable latency.

Thanks.

> 
> -- Steve
> 
> 
> --
> 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/
--
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/