On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
Linked list is used everywhere in the Linux kernel. However, if many
threads are trying to add or delete entries into the same linked list,
it can create a performance bottleneck.
This patch introduces a new list APIs that provide a set of distributed
lis
On Thu, 02 Nov 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
Instead of the current O(N) implementation; at the cost
of adding an atomic counter. We also need to add a heads
pointer to the node structure such that we can unaccount
a thread doing list_del().
The counter will then become the single contention point
On 11/02/2017 01:04 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>> +/**
>> + * dlock_lists_empty - Check if all the dlock lists are empty
>> + * @dlist: Pointer to the dlock_list_heads structure
>> + * Return: true if list is empty, false otherwise.
>> + * + * T
On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
+/**
+ * dlock_lists_empty - Check if all the dlock lists are empty
+ * @dlist: Pointer to the dlock_list_heads structure
+ * Return: true if list is empty, false otherwise.
+ *
+ * This can be a pretty expensive function call. If this function
On 10/31/2017 05:37 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>> +void dlock_lists_del(struct dlock_list_node *node)
>> +{
>> +struct dlock_list_head *head;
>> +bool retry;
>> +
>> +do {
>> +head = READ_ONCE(node->head);
>
> Boqun had previously poin
On Tue, 31 Oct 2017, Waiman Long wrote:
+void dlock_lists_del(struct dlock_list_node *node)
+{
+ struct dlock_list_head *head;
+ bool retry;
+
+ do {
+ head = READ_ONCE(node->head);
Boqun had previously pointed this out; you need to WRITE_ONCE() node->head too.
6 matches
Mail list logo
