lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH for 5.1 0/3] Restartable Sequences updates for 5.1
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 05:32:10PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Mar 5, 2019, at 4:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 03:18:35PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> * NUMA node ID in TLS
> >>
> >> Having the NUMA node ID available in a TLS variable would allow glibc to
> >> perform interesting NUMA performance improvements within its locking
> >> implementation, so I have a patch adding NUMA node ID support to rseq
> >> as a new rseq system call flag.
> >
> > Details? There's just not much room in the futex word, and futexes
> > themselves are not numa aware.
>
> It was discussed in this libc-alpha mailing list thread:
>
> https://public-inbox.org/libc-alpha/CAMe9rOo7i_-keOooa0D+P_wzatVCdKkTRiFiJ-cxpnvi+eApuQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> (adding the relevant people in CC)
>
> I'd like to hear in more details on how they intend to design
> NUMA-aware spinlocks within glibc. All I know is that quick
> access to the node ID would help for this.

Userspace spinlocks are a trainwreck anyway. The only case where they
can possibly work is when there's only a single thread on every cpu.
Pretty much any other scenario is fail; see why we have paravirt
spinlocks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-06 09:22    [W:0.079 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site