Re: [NET]: rt_check_expire() can take a long time, add a cond_resched()

[Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>]

Arjan van de Ven a écrit :
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 04:01:48 GMT
> Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > Gitweb:
> > http://git.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=d90bf5a976793edfa88d3bb2393f0231eb8ce1e5
> > Commit:     d90bf5a976793edfa88d3bb2393f0231eb8ce1e5 Parent:
> > 66ba886254edbbd9442d30f1eef6f6fb0145027d Author:     Eric Dumazet
> > <dada1@cosmosbay.com> AuthorDate: Wed Nov 14 16:14:05 2007 -0800
> > Committer:  David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > CommitDate: Wed Nov 14 16:14:05 2007 -0800
> >
> >     [NET]: rt_check_expire() can take a long time, add a
> > cond_resched() 
> >     On commit 39c90ece7565f5c47110c2fa77409d7a9478bd5b:
>
> >     When the IP route cache is big, rt_check_expire() can take a long
> > time to run.  (default settings : 20% of the hash table is scanned at
> > each invocation)
> >     
> >     Adding cond_resched() helps giving cpu to higher priority tasks if
> >     necessary.
> >     
> >     Using a "if (need_resched())" test before calling
> > "cond_resched();" is necessary to avoid spending too much time doing
> > the resched check. 
>
> int __sched cond_resched(void)
> {
>         if (need_resched() &&  .....
>
> somehow I wonder why the second if() is useful at all; it's another
> spot for a branch predictor to miss... and a void function call is
> really really cheap... 

Its not that cheap. The ChangeLog included my own numbers, on a Pentium M 
machine. (i686, 1.6 GHz, 1.5 GB ram)

Without "if (need_resched())" (so calling need_resched() X.XXX.XXX times), 
each run takes 88ms

With the extra check (and *much* less function calls), each run takes 25ms


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