Re: [rfc] lockless pagecache

[Martin J. Bligh]

>> > On Mon, 27 Jun 2005, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
>> > > I don't recall seeing tree_lock to be a problem for DSS workload either.
>> > 
>> > I have seen the tree_lock being a problem a number of times with large 
>> > scale NUMA type workloads.
>> 
>> I totally agree!  My earlier posts are strictly referring to industry
>> standard db workloads (OLTP, DSS).  I'm not saying it's not a problem
>> for everyone :-)  Obviously you just outlined a few ....
> 
> I'm a bit late to the party here (was gone on vacation), but I do have
> profiles from DSS workloads using page-cache rather than O_DIRECT and
> I do see spin_lock_irq() in the profiles which I'm pretty certain are
> locks spinning for access to the radix_tree.  I'll talk about it a bit
> more up in Ottawa but here's the top 5 on my profile (sorry don't have
> the number of ticks at the momement):
> 
> 1. dedicated_idle (waiting for I/O)
> 2. __copy_tofrom_user
> 3. radix_tree_delete
> 4. _spin_lock_irq
> 5. __find_get_block
> 
> So, yes, if the page-cache is used in a DSS workload then one will see
> the tree-lock.  BTW, this was on a PPC64 machine w/ a fairly small
> NUMA factor.

The easiest way to confirm the spin-lock thing is to recompile with 
CONFIG_SPINLINE, and take a new profile, then diff the two ...

M.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/