Sorry for the delay of pushing this and related dpdk patches, Want to spend some time next week measuring the performance impact,~
Thanks, Alex Wang, On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:48:49AM -0700, Alex Wang wrote: > > For performance-critical threads like pmd threads, we currently make them > > never call coverage_clear() to avoid contention over the global mutex > > 'coverage_mutex'. So, even though pmd thread still keeps updating their > > thread-local coverage count, the count is never attributed to the global > > total. But it is useful to have them available. > > > > This commit makes this happen by implementing a non-contending version > > of the clear function, coverage_try_clear(). The function will use > > the ovs_mutex_trylock() and return immediately if the mutex cannot > > be acquired. Since threads like pmd thread are always busy-looping, > > the lock will eventually be acquired. > > > > Requested-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com> > > Signed-off-by: Alex Wang <al...@nicira.com> > > This seems like an improvement. I can imagine better data structures > but I don't know whether they're worthwhile. > > Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
