On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 06 2009, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 05 2009, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > But then I noticed ps3vram_make_request() may be called concurrently,
> > > > so I had to add a mutex to avoid data corruption. This slows the
> > > > driver down, and in the end, the version with a thread turns out to be
> > > > ca. 1% faster. The version without a thread is about 50 lines less
> > > > code, though.
> > >
> > > That is correct, ->make_request_fn may get reentered. I'm not surprised
> > > that performance dropped if you just shoved everything under a mutex.
> > > You could be a little more smart and queue concurrent bio's for
> > > processing when the current one is complete though, there are several
> > > approaches there that be a lot faster than going all the way through the
> > > IO stack and scheduler just to avoid concurrency.
> >
> > Yes, using a spinlock and queueing requests on a list if the driver is
> > busy can be done after 2.6.29...
>
> Certainly. Even just replacing your current mutex with a spinlock during
> the memcpy() would surely be a lot faster. Or even just grabbing the
> mutex before calling into the write for the duration of the bio. The way
> you do it is certain context switch death :-)
It's not just the memcpy(). ps3vram_{up,down}load() call msleep(), so I cannot
use a spinlock.
With kind regards,
Geert Uytterhoeven
Software Architect
Sony Techsoft Centre Europe
The Corporate Village · Da Vincilaan 7-D1 · B-1935 Zaventem · Belgium
Phone: +32 (0)2 700 8453
Fax: +32 (0)2 700 8622
E-mail: geert.uytterhoe...@sonycom.com
Internet: http://www.sony-europe.com/
A division of Sony Europe (Belgium) N.V.
VAT BE 0413.825.160 · RPR Brussels
Fortis · BIC GEBABEBB · IBAN BE41293037680010
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
