On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 February 2007 03:32, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > Epoll is doing multiple passes over the ready set at the moment, because
> > of the constraints over the f_op->poll() call. Looking at the code again,
> > I noticed that we already hold the epoll semaphore in read, and this
> > (together with other locking conditions that hold while doing an
> > epoll_wait()) can lead to a smarter way to "ship" events to userspace (in
> > a single pass). I added more (even) more comments to the code to explain
> > the conditions why certain operations are safe.
> > This is a stress application that can be used to test the new code. It
> > spwans multiple thread and call epoll_wait() and epoll_ctl() from many
> > threads. Stress tested on my dual Opteron 254 w/out any problems.
>
> Davide,
>
> This is really cool, because the size of epitem would fit now in 128 bytes
> instead of 192 (on x86_64 platforms). So we also reduce memory usage.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that I removed the txlink member.
> I have one comment :
>
> > */
> > - list_for_each(lnk, txlist) {
> > - epi = list_entry(lnk, struct epitem, txlink);
> > + for (eventcnt = 0; !list_empty(txlist) && eventcnt < maxevents;) {
> > + epi = list_entry(txlist->next, struct epitem, rdllink);
>
> Now that we scan the rdllist list once, it may be usefull to use a prefetch()
> hint.
>
> list_for_each() has one prefetch(pos->next) automatically included, but not
> your open coded loop.
>
> I suggest adding after epi = list_entry(txlist->next, struct epitem, rdllink);
> prefetch(epi->rdllink.next);
Will do in the next version, thx!
- Davide
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
