Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1501327

Re: [PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of

From Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of
Date 2016-10-15 19:00 +0200
Message-ID <ssAtr-1OK-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <ssy8i-nb-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 10:12:48PM +0800, zhouxianrong@huawei.com wrote:
> From: z00281421 <z00281421@notesmail.huawei.com>
> 
> i think no need to place __free_vmap_area loop in purge_lock;
> _free_vmap_area could be non-atomic operations with flushing tlb
> but must be done after flush tlb. and the whole__free_vmap_area loops
> also could be non-atomic operations. if so we could improve realtime
> because the loop times sometimes is larg and spend a few time.

Right, see the previous patch in reply to Joel that drops purge_lock
entirely.

Instead of your open coded batch counter you probably want to add
a cond_resched_lock after the call to __free_vmap_area.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of <zhouxianrong@huawei.com> - 2016-10-15 16:30 +0200
  Re: [PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> - 2016-10-15 19:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of zhouxianrong <zhouxianrong@huawei.com> - 2016-10-18 05:00 +0200
  [PATCH vmalloc] reduce purge_lock range and hold time of vmap_area_lock <zhouxianrong@huawei.com> - 2016-10-18 04:30 +0200

csiph-web