From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/wait: Add add_wait_queue_priority()
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 21:30:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201027203041.GS2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <220a7b090d27ffc8f3d00253c289ddd964a8462b.camel@infradead.org>
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 07:27:59PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > While looking at this I found that weird __add_wait_queue_exclusive()
> > which is used by fs/eventpoll.c and does something similar, except it
> > doesn't keep the FIFO order.
>
> It does, doesn't it? Except those so-called "exclusive" entries end up
> in FIFO order amongst themselves at the *tail* of the queue, to be
> woken up only after all the other entries before them *haven't* been
> excluded.
__add_wait_queue_exclusive() uses __add_wait_queue() which does
list_add(). It does _not_ add at the tail like normal exclusive users,
and there is exactly _1_ user in tree that does this.
I'm not exactly sure how this happened, but:
add_wait_queue_exclusive()
and
__add_wait_queue_exclusive()
are not related :-(
> > The Changelog doesn't state how important this property is to you.
>
> Because it isn't :)
>
> The ordering is:
>
> { PRIORITY }* { NON-EXCLUSIVE }* { EXCLUSIVE(sic) }*
>
> I care that PRIORITY comes before the others, because I want to
> actually exclude the others. Especially the "non-exclusive" ones, which
> the 'exclusive' ones don't actually exclude.
>
> I absolutely don't care about ordering *within* the set of PRIORITY
> entries, since as I said I expect there to be only one.
Then you could arguably do something like:
spin_lock_irqsave(&wq_head->lock, flags);
__add_wait_queue_exclusive(wq_head, wq_entry);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&wq_head->lock, flags);
and leave it at that.
But now I'm itching to fix that horrible naming... tomorrow perhaps.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-27 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-26 17:53 [RFC PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: Add add_wait_queue_priority() David Woodhouse
2020-10-26 17:53 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] kvm/eventfd: Use priority waitqueue to catch events before userspace David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 8:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-10-27 10:15 ` David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 13:55 ` [PATCH 0/3] Allow in-kernel consumers to drain events from eventfd David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 13:55 ` [PATCH 1/3] eventfd: Export eventfd_ctx_do_read() David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 13:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] vfio/virqfd: Drain events from eventfd in virqfd_wakeup() David Woodhouse
2020-11-06 23:29 ` Alex Williamson
2020-11-08 9:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-10-27 13:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] kvm/eventfd: Drain events from eventfd in irqfd_wakeup() David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 18:41 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-27 21:42 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-27 23:13 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-27 14:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Allow KVM IRQFD to consistently intercept events David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 14:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] sched/wait: Add add_wait_queue_priority() David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 19:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-27 19:27 ` David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 20:30 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-10-27 20:49 ` David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 21:32 ` David Woodhouse
2020-10-28 14:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-10-28 14:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-10-28 14:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-04 9:35 ` David Woodhouse
2020-11-04 11:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-11-06 10:17 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-11-06 16:32 ` Alex Williamson
2020-11-06 17:18 ` David Woodhouse
2020-10-27 14:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] kvm/eventfd: Use priority waitqueue to catch events before userspace David Woodhouse
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=20201027203041.GS2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).