Re: [PATCH v3] lib/idr.c rewrite, percpu ida/tag allocator

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Sat, Jul 06, 2013 at 03:59:06PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 22:08 -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > Previous posting: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1511216
> > 
> > The only real change since the last version is that I've reworked the
> > new ida implementation to not use one giant allocation - it's still
> > logically one big arary, but it's implemented as an array of arrays.
> > 
> > With that, it scales up to INT_MAX allocated ids just fine. Benchmarks
> > are included in that patch.
> > 
> > Patch series is available in my git repo:
> > git://evilpiepirate.org/~kent/linux-bcache.git idr
> > 
> > Andrew, want to pick this up for 3.12?
> 
> Just FYI that the target-pending/target-per-cpu-ida branch utilizing
> per-cpu ida logic for vhost-scsi has been rebased to include this latest
> series.  Thanks Kent!
> 
> Andrew, what are your plans for this..?
> 
> Would you consider allowing this series be merged through target-pending
> in order to allow us to start taking advantage of per-cpu ida tag
> pre-allocation optimizations for v3.12 target code..? 
> 
> Another option would be to merge the per-cpu ida specific piece now for
> v3.11 for which the risk is low given it doesn't touch any existing
> code, and then include Kent's full idr rewrite separately as v3.12 item.
> 
> WDYT..?

Takes as is, this conflicts with cleanup patches by Asias in vhost-next
that I was going to send to Linus for 3.11.
Merging new target code for 3.11 and vhost code for 3.12
helps keep the dependencies simple, so I'm all for it.


> 
> --nab
--
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/