Message ID | 20190503111841.4391-1-trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | bh-safe lock removal for SUNRPC | expand |
Hi Trond- > On May 3, 2019, at 7:18 AM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@gmail.com> wrote: > > This patchset aims to remove the bh-safe locks on the client side. > At this time it should be seen as a toy/strawman effort in order to > help the community figure out whether or not there are setups out > there that are actually seeing performance bottlenecks resulting > from taking bh-safe locks inside other spinlocks. What kernel does this patch set apply to? I've tried both v5.0 and v5.1, but there appear to be some changes that I'm missing. The first patch does not apply cleanly. > Trond Myklebust (5): > SUNRPC: Replace the queue timer with a delayed work function > SUNRPC: Replace direct task wakeups from softirq context > SUNRPC: Remove the bh-safe lock requirement on xprt->transport_lock > SUNRPC: Remove the bh-safe lock requirement on the > rpc_wait_queue->lock > SUNRPC: Reduce the priority of the xprtiod queue > > include/linux/sunrpc/sched.h | 3 +- > include/linux/sunrpc/xprtsock.h | 5 + > net/sunrpc/sched.c | 76 +++++++++------- > net/sunrpc/xprt.c | 61 ++++++------- > net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/rpc_rdma.c | 4 +- > net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_backchannel.c | 4 +- > net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma_transport.c | 8 +- > net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++---- > 8 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.21.0 > -- Chuck Lever
On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 14:22 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > Hi Trond- > > > On May 3, 2019, at 7:18 AM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > This patchset aims to remove the bh-safe locks on the client side. > > At this time it should be seen as a toy/strawman effort in order to > > help the community figure out whether or not there are setups out > > there that are actually seeing performance bottlenecks resulting > > from taking bh-safe locks inside other spinlocks. > > What kernel does this patch set apply to? I've tried both v5.0 and > v5.1, but there appear to be some changes that I'm missing. The > first patch does not apply cleanly. > It should hopefully apply on top of Anna's linux-next branch.
> On May 6, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-05-06 at 14:22 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >> Hi Trond- >> >>> On May 3, 2019, at 7:18 AM, Trond Myklebust <trondmy@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> This patchset aims to remove the bh-safe locks on the client side. >>> At this time it should be seen as a toy/strawman effort in order to >>> help the community figure out whether or not there are setups out >>> there that are actually seeing performance bottlenecks resulting >>> from taking bh-safe locks inside other spinlocks. >> >> What kernel does this patch set apply to? I've tried both v5.0 and >> v5.1, but there appear to be some changes that I'm missing. The >> first patch does not apply cleanly. >> > > It should hopefully apply on top of Anna's linux-next branch. OK, you did mention that to me last week. Sorry for the noise. -- Chuck Lever