Re: [PATCH RFC] reduce runqueue lock contention

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu May 20 2010 - 17:09:57 EST

On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 16:48 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> This is more of a starting point than a patch, but it is something I've
> been meaning to look at for a long time. Many different workloads end
> up hammering very hard on try_to_wake_up, to the point where the
> runqueue locks dominate CPU profiles.

Right, so one of the things that I considered was to make p->state an
atomic_t and replace the initial stage of try_to_wake_up() with
something like:

int try_to_wake_up(struct task *p, unsigned int mask, wake_flags)
int state = atomic_read(&p->state);

do {
if (!(state & mask))
return 0;

state = atomic_cmpxchg(&p->state, state, TASK_WAKING);
} while (state != TASK_WAKING);

/* do this pending queue + ipi thing */

return 1;

Also, I think we might want to put that atomic single linked list thing
into some header (using atomic_long_t or so), because I have a similar
thing living in kernel/perf_event.c, that needs to queue things from NMI

The advantage of doing basically the whole enqueue on the remote cpu is
less cacheline bouncing of the runqueue structures.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at