From: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Paul E. McKenney)
Subject: [lttng-dev] [rp] [URCU PATCH 0/3] wait-free concurrent queues (wfcqueue)
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 11:51:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121004185120.GA23484@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121003210436.GB25090@Krystal>
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 05:04:36PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Paul E. McKenney (paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 10:13:07AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > Implement wait-free concurrent queues, with a new API different from
> > > wfqueue.h, which is already provided by Userspace RCU. The advantage of
> > > splitting the head and tail objects of the queue into different
> > > arguments is to allow these to sit on different cache-lines, thus
> > > eliminating false-sharing, leading to a 2.3x speed increase.
> > >
> > > This API also introduces a "splice" operation, which moves all nodes
> > > from one queue into another, and postpones the synchronization to either
> > > dequeue or iteration on the list. The splice operation does not need to
> > > touch every single node of the queue it moves them from. Moreover, the
> > > splice operation only needs to ensure mutual exclusion with other
> > > dequeuers, iterations, and splice operations from the list it splices
> > > from, but acts as a simple enqueuer on the list it splices into (no
> > > mutual exclusion needed for that list).
> > >
> > > Feedback is welcome,
> >
> > These look sane to me, though I must confess that the tail pointer
> > referencing the node rather than the node's next pointer did throw
> > me for a bit. ;-)
>
> Yes, this was originally introduced with Lai's original patch to
> wfqueue, which I think is a nice simplification: it's pretty much the
> same thing to use the last node address as tail rather than the address
> of its first member (its next pointer address (_not_ value)). It ends up
> being the same address in this case, but more interestingly, we don't
> have to use a struct cds_wfcq_node ** type: a simple struct
> cds_wfcq_node * suffice.
>
> Thanks Paul, I will therefore merge these 3 patches with your Acked-by.
Good point -- just confirming:
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Lai, you are welcome to provide improvements to this code against the
> master branch. I will gladly consider any change you propose.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Mathieu
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
> EfficiOS Inc.
> http://www.efficios.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> rp mailing list
> rp at svcs.cs.pdx.edu
> http://svcs.cs.pdx.edu/mailman/listinfo/rp
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-04 18:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-02 14:13 [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-02 14:14 ` [lttng-dev] [URCU PATCH 1/3] wfcqueue: implement concurrency-efficient queue Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-08 15:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-08 16:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-08 16:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-10-08 18:10 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-10 2:56 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-10 4:50 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-02 14:15 ` [lttng-dev] [URCU PATCH 2/3] wfcqueue test Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-02 14:16 ` [lttng-dev] [URCU PATCH 3/3] call_rcu: use wfcqueue, eliminate false-sharing Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-08 3:09 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-08 14:49 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-08 15:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-10-08 16:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-03 18:28 ` [lttng-dev] [rp] [URCU PATCH 0/3] wait-free concurrent queues (wfcqueue) Paul E. McKenney
2012-10-03 21:04 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-04 18:51 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2012-10-08 3:33 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-08 15:07 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2012-10-10 2:53 ` Lai Jiangshan
2012-10-10 4:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121004185120.GA23484@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox