1. 07 Mar, 2011 6 commits
  2. 05 Mar, 2011 32 commits
  3. 04 Mar, 2011 2 commits
    • Eric Dumazet's avatar
      inetpeer: seqlock optimization · 65e8354e
      Eric Dumazet authored
      David noticed :
      
      ------------------
      Eric, I was profiling the non-routing-cache case and something that
      stuck out is the case of calling inet_getpeer() with create==0.
      
      If an entry is not found, we have to redo the lookup under a spinlock
      to make certain that a concurrent writer rebalancing the tree does
      not "hide" an existing entry from us.
      
      This makes the case of a create==0 lookup for a not-present entry
      really expensive.  It is on the order of 600 cpu cycles on my
      Niagara2.
      
      I added a hack to not do the relookup under the lock when create==0
      and it now costs less than 300 cycles.
      
      This is now a pretty common operation with the way we handle COW'd
      metrics, so I think it's definitely worth optimizing.
      -----------------
      
      One solution is to use a seqlock instead of a spinlock to protect struct
      inet_peer_base.
      
      After a failed avl tree lookup, we can easily detect if a writer did
      some changes during our lookup. Taking the lock and redo the lookup is
      only necessary in this case.
      
      Note: Add one private rcu_deref_locked() macro to place in one spot the
      access to spinlock included in seqlock.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarEric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      65e8354e
    • David S. Miller's avatar