From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-aio@kvack.org, Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@in.ibm.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:46:19 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701301838110.3611@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1170209044.26655.364.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > - We would now have some measure of task_struct concurrency. Read that twice,
> > it's scary. As two fibrils execute and block in turn they'll each be
> > referencing current->. It means that we need to audit task_struct to make sure
> > that paths can handle racing as its scheduled away. The current implementation
> > *does not* let preemption trigger a fibril switch. So one only has to worry
> > about racing with voluntary scheduling of the fibril paths. This can mean
> > moving some task_struct members under an accessor that hides them in a struct
> > in task_struct so they're switched along with the fibril. I think this is a
> > manageable burden.
>
> That's the one scaring me in fact ... Maybe it will end up being an easy
> one but I don't feel too comfortable...
We actually have almost zero "interesting" data in the task-struct.
All the real meat of a task has long since been split up into structures
that can be shared for threading anyway (ie signal/files/mm/etc).
Which is why I'm personally very comfy with just re-using task_struct
as-is.
NOTE! This is with the understanding that we *never* do any preemption.
The whole point of the microthreading as far as I'm concerned is exactly
that it is cooperative. It's not preemptive, and it's emphatically *not*
concurrent (ie you'd never have two fibrils running at the same time on
separate CPU's).
If you want preemptive of concurrent CPU usage, you use separate threads.
The point of AIO scheduling is very much inherent in its name: it's for
filling up CPU's when there's IO.
So the theory (and largely practice) is that you want to use real threads
to fill your CPU's, but then *within* those threads you use AIO to make
sure that each thread actually uses the CPU efficiently and doesn't just
block with nothing to do.
So with the understanding that this is neither CPU-concurrent nor
preemptive (*within* a fibril group - obviously the thread itself gets
both preempted and concurrently run with other threads), I don't worry at
all about sharing "struct task_struct".
Does that mean that we might not have some cases where we'd need to make
sure we do things differently? Of course not. Something migt show up. But
this actually makes it very clear what the difference between "struct
thread_struct" and "struct task_struct" are. One is shared between
fibrils, the other isn't.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-31 2:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 151+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-30 20:39 [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks Zach Brown
2007-01-30 20:39 ` [PATCH 1 of 4] Introduce per_call_chain() Zach Brown
2007-01-30 20:39 ` [PATCH 2 of 4] Introduce i386 fibril scheduling Zach Brown
2007-02-01 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-01 13:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-01 13:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-02-01 13:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-01 17:13 ` Mark Lord
2007-02-01 18:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-02 13:23 ` Andi Kleen
2007-02-01 21:52 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-01 22:23 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-02-01 22:37 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-02 13:22 ` Andi Kleen
2007-02-01 20:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 10:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-02 15:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 19:59 ` Alan
2007-02-02 20:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 20:58 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-02 21:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 21:30 ` Alan
2007-02-02 21:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 22:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-02 23:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 23:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-03 0:04 ` Alan
2007-02-03 0:23 ` bert hubert
2007-02-02 22:48 ` Alan
2007-02-05 16:44 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-02 22:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-02 22:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-02 23:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-03 0:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-03 7:15 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2007-02-03 8:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-03 9:25 ` Matt Mackall
2007-02-03 10:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-02-05 17:44 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 19:26 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 19:41 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 20:10 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 20:21 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 20:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-05 20:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-05 21:09 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 21:31 ` Kent Overstreet
2007-02-06 20:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-06 20:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-06 21:16 ` David Miller
2007-02-06 21:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-06 21:31 ` David Miller
2007-02-06 21:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-02-06 21:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-06 22:28 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-06 22:45 ` Kent Overstreet
2007-02-06 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-07 1:22 ` Kent Overstreet
2007-02-06 23:23 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-06 23:39 ` Joel Becker
2007-02-06 23:56 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-07 0:06 ` Joel Becker
2007-02-07 0:23 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-07 0:44 ` Joel Becker
2007-02-07 1:15 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-07 1:24 ` Kent Overstreet
2007-02-07 1:30 ` Joel Becker
2007-02-07 6:16 ` Michael K. Edwards
2007-02-07 9:17 ` Michael K. Edwards
2007-02-07 9:37 ` Michael K. Edwards
2007-02-06 0:32 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 21:21 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-02 23:37 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-03 0:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 17:12 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 18:24 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 21:44 ` David Miller
2007-02-06 0:15 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 21:36 ` bert hubert
2007-02-05 21:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-05 22:07 ` bert hubert
2007-02-05 22:15 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 22:34 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-06 0:27 ` Scot McKinley
2007-02-06 0:48 ` David Miller
2007-02-06 0:48 ` Joel Becker
2007-02-05 17:02 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 18:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 19:20 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-05 19:38 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-04 5:12 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-05 17:54 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-30 20:39 ` [PATCH 3 of 4] Teach paths to wake a specific void * target instead of a whole task_struct Zach Brown
2007-01-30 20:39 ` [PATCH 4 of 4] Introduce aio system call submission and completion system calls Zach Brown
2007-01-31 8:58 ` Andi Kleen
2007-01-31 17:15 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 17:21 ` Andi Kleen
2007-01-31 19:23 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-01 11:13 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2007-02-01 19:50 ` Trond Myklebust
2007-02-02 7:19 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2007-02-02 7:45 ` Andi Kleen
2007-02-01 22:18 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-02 3:35 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2007-02-01 20:26 ` bert hubert
2007-02-01 21:29 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-02 7:12 ` bert hubert
2007-02-04 5:12 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-01-30 21:58 ` [PATCH 0 of 4] Generic AIO by scheduling stacks Linus Torvalds
2007-01-30 22:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-30 22:53 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-30 22:40 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-30 22:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-30 23:45 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 2:07 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-01-31 2:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-01-31 2:46 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-01-31 3:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-31 10:50 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-01-31 19:28 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 17:59 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 5:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-01-31 5:36 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-31 5:51 ` Nick Piggin
2007-01-31 6:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-31 8:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-01-31 20:13 ` Joel Becker
2007-01-31 18:20 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 17:47 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 17:38 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 17:51 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-01-31 19:25 ` Zach Brown
2007-01-31 20:05 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-01-31 20:41 ` Zach Brown
2007-02-04 5:13 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-04 20:00 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-09 22:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-09 23:11 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-09 23:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-10 18:45 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-10 19:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-10 19:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-10 20:59 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-10 0:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-02-10 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-10 0:34 ` Alan
2007-02-10 10:47 ` bert hubert
2007-02-10 18:19 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-11 0:56 ` David Miller
2007-02-11 2:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-14 16:42 ` James Antill
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0701301838110.3611@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=suparna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=zach.brown@oracle.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.