On 16/03/07, Pavel Emelianov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/14, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Pavel Emelianov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> I'm looking at how alloc_pid() works and can't understand
>>> one (simple/stupid) thing.
>>>
>>> It first kmem_cache_alloc()-s a strct pid, then calls
>>> alloc_pidmap() and at the end it taks a global pidmap_lock()
>>> to add new pid to hash.
>
> We need some global lock. pidmap_lock is already here, and it is
> only used to protect pidmap->page allocation. Iow, it is almost
> unused. So it was very natural to re-use it while implementing
> pidrefs.
>
>>> The question is - why does alloc_pidmap() use at least
>>> two atomic ops and potentially loop to find a zero bit
>>> in pidmap? Why not call alloc_pidmap() under pidmap_lock
>>> and find zero pid in pidmap w/o any loops and atomics?
>
> Currently we search for zero bit lockless, why do you want
> to do it under spin_lock ?
Search isn't lockless. Look:
while (1) {
if (!test_and_set_bit(...)) {
atomic_dec(&nr_free);
return pid;
}
we use two atomic operations to find and set a bit in a map.
While you may have a few concurrent threads competing for the same
"offset" and "pid" in the loop - e.g. at point [1] (see below), only
one will succeed with "registering" it due to the atomicity of
test_and_set_bit() and so only this one will get at point [2] with the
"pid".
The rest of the "unlucky" threads will either
(i) compete for another "offset" -> "pid" (as described above);
(ii) leave the loop when one of the conditions of while() becomes
"false" -> e.g. there are no more free slots in this map.
if (likely(atomic_read(&map->nr_free))) {
do {
// [1]
if (!test_and_set_bit(offset, map->page)) {
// [2]
atomic_dec(&map->nr_free);
pid_ns->last_pid = pid;
return pid;
}
offset = find_next_offset(map, offset);
pid = mk_pid(pid_ns, map, offset);
/*
* find_next_offset() found a bit, the pid from it
* is in-bounds, and if we fell back to the last
* bitmap block and the final block was the same
* as the starting point, pid is before last_pid.
*/
} while (offset < BITS_PER_PAGE && pid < pid_max &&
(i != max_scan || pid < last ||
!((last+1) & BITS_PER_PAGE_MASK)));
}
...
> Oleg.
>
>
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko
-
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/
