Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> writes:
> I made this:
>
> ---
> Subject: sched/fair: Move hot load_avg into its own cacheline
> From: Waiman Long <waiman.l...@hpe.com>
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 13:41:49 -0500
>
[...]
> @@ -7402,11 +7405,12 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
> #endif /* CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED */
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED
> + task_group_cache = KMEM_CACHE(task_group, 0);
> +
> list_add(&root_task_group.list, &task_groups);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&root_task_group.children);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&root_task_group.siblings);
> autogroup_init(&init_task);
> -
> #endif /* CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED */
>
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> --- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
> @@ -248,7 +248,12 @@ struct task_group {
> unsigned long shares;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> - atomic_long_t load_avg;
> + /*
> + * load_avg can be heavily contended at clock tick time, so put
> + * it in its own cacheline separated from the fields above which
> + * will also be accessed at each tick.
> + */
> + atomic_long_t load_avg ____cacheline_aligned;
> #endif
> #endif
>
This loses the cacheline-alignment for task_group, is that ok?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
