From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Rick Lindsley <ricklind@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 13:53:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200622175343.GC13061@mtj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa22c563-73b7-5e45-2120-71108ca8d1a0@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 07:44:29PM -0700, Rick Lindsley wrote:
> echo 0 > /sys/devices//system/memory/memory10374/online
>
> and boom - you've taken memory chunk 10374 offline.
>
> These changes are not just a whim. I used lockstat to measure contention
> during boot. The addition of 250,000 "devices" in parallel created
> tremendous contention on the kernfs_mutex and, it appears, on one of the
> directories within it where memory nodes are created. Using a mutex means
> that the details of that mutex must bounce around all the cpus ... did I
> mention 1500+ cpus? A whole lot of thrash ...
I don't know. The above highlights the absurdity of the approach itself to
me. You seem to be aware of it too in writing: 250,000 "devices".
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-22 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-17 7:37 [PATCH v2 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] kernfs: switch kernfs to use an rwsem Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] kernfs: move revalidate to be near lookup Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] kernfs: improve kernfs path resolution Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:38 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] kernfs: use revision to identify directory node changes Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:38 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] kernfs: refactor attr locking Ian Kent
2020-06-17 7:38 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] kernfs: make attr_mutex a local kernfs node lock Ian Kent
2020-06-19 15:38 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement Tejun Heo
2020-06-19 20:41 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-19 22:23 ` Tejun Heo
2020-06-20 2:44 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-22 17:53 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2020-06-22 21:22 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-23 23:13 ` Tejun Heo
2020-06-24 9:04 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-24 9:27 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-24 13:19 ` Tejun Heo
2020-06-25 8:15 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-25 9:43 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-26 0:19 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-21 4:55 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-22 17:48 ` Tejun Heo
2020-06-22 18:03 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-22 21:27 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-23 5:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-23 5:09 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-23 6:02 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-23 8:01 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-23 8:29 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-23 11:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-23 9:33 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-23 11:45 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2020-06-23 22:55 ` Rick Lindsley
2020-06-23 11:51 ` Ian Kent
2020-06-21 3:21 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-10 16:44 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-11 2:01 ` [PATCH " Ian Kent
2020-12-11 2:17 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-13 3:46 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-14 6:14 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-14 13:30 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-15 8:33 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-15 12:59 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-17 4:46 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-17 8:54 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-17 10:09 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-17 11:09 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-17 11:48 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-17 15:14 ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-18 7:36 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-18 8:01 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-18 11:21 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-18 13:20 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-19 0:53 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-19 7:47 ` Fox Chen
2020-12-22 2:17 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-18 14:59 ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-19 7:08 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-19 16:23 ` Tejun Heo
2020-12-19 23:52 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-20 1:37 ` Ian Kent
2020-12-21 9:28 ` Fox Chen
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=20200622175343.GC13061@mtj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=ricklind@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.