Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752727Ab0AVM3v (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752144Ab0AVM3u (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:50 -0500 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.230]:19231 "EHLO mgw-mx03.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751502Ab0AVM3t (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib: more scalable list_sort() From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org To: Andi Kleen Cc: Don Mullis , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, airlied@redhat.com, david@fromorbit.com In-Reply-To: <87k4vah12u.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> References: <87fx609i29.fsf@gmail.com> <20100121175914.GA8910@basil.fritz.box> <87vdeu96bo.fsf@gmail.com> <87k4vah12u.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:29:08 +0200 Message-Id: <1264163348.3032.240.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 (2.26.3-1.fc11) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jan 2010 12:29:13.0057 (UTC) FILETIME=[8136E510:01CA9B5E] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1722 Lines: 38 On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 11:43 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Don Mullis writes: > > > > Being just a dumb library routine, list_sort() has no idea what context > > it's been called in, how long a list a particular client could pass in, > > nor how expensive the client's cmp() callback might be. > > > > The cmp() callback already passes back a client-private pointer. > > Hanging off of this could be a count of calls, or timing information, > > maintained by the client. Whenever some threshold is reached, the > > client's cmp() could do whatever good CPU-sharing citizenship required. > > need_resched() does all the timing/thresholding (it checks the > reschedule flag set by the timer interrupt). You just have to call it. > But preferable not in the inner loop, but in a outer one. It's > not hyper-expensive, but it's not free either. > > The drawback is that if it's called the context always has to > allow sleeping, so it might need to be optional. > > Anyways a better fix might be simply to ensure in the caller > that lists never get as long that they become a scheduling > hazard. But you indicated that ubifs would pass very long lists? > Perhaps ubifs (and other calls who might have that problem) simply > needs to be fixed. No, they are not very long. A hundred or so I guess, rarely. But we need to check what is really the worst case, but it should not be too many. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/