Re: [RFC PATCH] introduce sys_membarrier(): process-wide memorybarrier

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

* Peter Zijlstra (peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 22:35 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > 
> > The number of threads doesn't matter nearly as much as the number of
> > threads typically running at a time compared to the number of
> > processors.  Of course, we can't measure that as easily, but I don't
> > know that your proposed heuristic would approximate it well.
> 
> Quite agreed, and not disturbing RT tasks is even more important.
> 
> A simple:
> 
>   for_each_cpu(cpu, current->mm->cpu_vm_mask) {
>      if (cpu_curr(cpu)->mm == current->mm)
>         smp_call_function_single(cpu, func, NULL, 1);
>   }
> 
> seems far preferable over anything else, if you really want you can use
> a cpumask to copy cpu_vm_mask in and unset bits and use the mask with
> smp_call_function_any(), but that includes having to allocate the
> cpumask, which might or might not be too expensive for Mathieu.
> 

I like this ! :)

Following some testing, I think I'll go with your scheme, with 2
smp_call_function_single (one function call for the local thread, one
IPI). If we need more than that, then we allocate a cpumask and call
smp_call_function_many() for the other cpus. I provide benchmarks in my
reply to Josh justifying this choice.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/