|
This patch changes rhashtables to use a bit_spin_lock on BIT(1) of the
bucket pointer to lock the hash chain for that bucket.
The benefits of a bit spin_lock are:
- no need to allocate a separate array of locks.
- no need to have a configuration option to guide the
choice of the size of this array
- locking cost is often a single test-and-set in a cache line
that will have to be loaded anyway. When inserting at, or removing
from, the head of the chain, the unlock is free - writing the new
address in the bucket head implicitly clears the lock bit.
For __rhashtable_insert_fast() we ensure this always happens
when adding a new key.
- even when lockings costs 2 updates (lock and unlock), they are
in a cacheline that needs to be read anyway.
The cost of using a bit spin_lock is a little bit of code complexity,
which I think is quite manageable.
Bit spin_locks are sometimes inappropriate because they are not fair -
if multiple CPUs repeatedly contend of the same lock, one CPU can
easily be starved. This is not a credible situation with rhashtable.
Multiple CPUs may want to repeatedly add or remove objects, but they
will typically do so at different buckets, so they will attempt to
acquire different locks.
As we have more bit-locks than we previously had spinlocks (by at
least a factor of two) we can expect slightly less contention to
go with the slightly better cache behavior and reduced memory
consumption.
To enhance type checking, a new struct is introduced to represent the
pointer plus lock-bit
that is stored in the bucket-table. This is "struct rhash_lock_head"
and is empty. A pointer to this needs to be cast to either an
unsigned lock, or a "struct rhash_head *" to be useful.
Variables of this type are most often called "bkt".
Previously "pprev" would sometimes point to a bucket, and sometimes a
->next pointer in an rhash_head. As these are now different types,
pprev is NULL when it would have pointed to the bucket. In that case,
'blk' is used, together with correct locking protocol.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
This "feature" is unused, undocumented, and untested and so doesn't
really belong. A patch is under development to properly implement
support for detecting when a search gets diverted down a different
chain, which the common purpose of nulls markers.
This patch actually fixes a bug too. The table resizing allows a
table to grow to 2^31 buckets, but the hash is truncated to 27 bits -
any growth beyond 2^27 is wasteful an ineffective.
This patch results in NULLS_MARKER(0) being used for all chains,
and leaves the use of rht_is_a_null() to test for it.
Acked-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
