All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>
To: pasha.tatashin@oracle.com, steven.sistare@oracle.com,
	daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	alexander.duyck@gmail.com, tobin@apporbit.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] multi-threading device shutdown
Date: Sat,  5 May 2018 11:40:39 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180505154040.28614-1-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com> (raw)

Changelog

v1 - v2
	- It turns out we cannot lock more than MAX_LOCK_DEPTH by a single
	  thread. (By default this value is 48), and is used to detect
	  deadlocks. So, I re-wrote the code to only lock one devices per
	  thread instead of pre-locking all devices by the main thread.
	- Addressed comments from Tobin C. Harding.
	- As suggested by Alexander Duyck removed ixgbe changes. It can be
	  done as a separate work scaling RTNL mutex.

Do a faster shutdown by calling dev->*->shutdown(dev) in parallel.
device_shutdown() calls these functions for every single device but
only using one thread.

Since, nothing else is running on the machine by the device_shutdown()
s called, there is no reason not to utilize all the available CPU
resources.

Pavel Tatashin (1):
  drivers core: multi-threading device shutdown

 drivers/base/core.c | 275 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 225 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.0

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 0/1] multi-threading device shutdown
Date: Sat,  5 May 2018 11:40:39 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180505154040.28614-1-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com> (raw)

Changelog

v1 - v2
	- It turns out we cannot lock more than MAX_LOCK_DEPTH by a single
	  thread. (By default this value is 48), and is used to detect
	  deadlocks. So, I re-wrote the code to only lock one devices per
	  thread instead of pre-locking all devices by the main thread.
	- Addressed comments from Tobin C. Harding.
	- As suggested by Alexander Duyck removed ixgbe changes. It can be
	  done as a separate work scaling RTNL mutex.

Do a faster shutdown by calling dev->*->shutdown(dev) in parallel.
device_shutdown() calls these functions for every single device but
only using one thread.

Since, nothing else is running on the machine by the device_shutdown()
s called, there is no reason not to utilize all the available CPU
resources.

Pavel Tatashin (1):
  drivers core: multi-threading device shutdown

 drivers/base/core.c | 275 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 225 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.0


             reply	other threads:[~2018-05-05 15:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-05 15:40 Pavel Tatashin [this message]
2018-05-05 15:40 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 0/1] multi-threading device shutdown Pavel Tatashin
2018-05-05 15:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] drivers core: " Pavel Tatashin
2018-05-05 15:40   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Pavel Tatashin
2018-05-06  1:56   ` kbuild test robot
2018-05-06  1:56     ` kbuild test robot
2018-05-06  1:56   ` [RFC PATCH] drivers core: device_root_tasks_done can be static kbuild test robot
2018-05-06  1:56     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " kbuild test robot
2018-05-23 10:40   ` [PATCH v2 1/1] drivers core: multi-threading device shutdown Pavel Machek
2018-05-23 10:40     ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Pavel Machek
2018-05-23 11:31     ` Pavel Tatashin
2018-05-23 11:31       ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Pavel Tatashin

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=20180505154040.28614-1-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com \
    --to=pasha.tatashin@oracle.com \
    --cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=steven.sistare@oracle.com \
    --cc=tobin@apporbit.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.