|
Hello,
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:46:35AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > This is the second patchset with IPVS optimizations.
> > Now we convert the schedulers, dests and services to RCU.
> >
> > All patches are for net-next based on the first
> > patchset v3. The idea is after discussion and review Simon to
> > apply the patchset after a week or so to ipvs-next tree.
> >
> > The changes in this patchset eliminate global locks
> > from packet processing by using RCU. There are more details
> > in the patches.
> >
> > After this patchset the situation is as follows:
> >
> > - dests:
> > - lookups under RCU lock allow ip_vs_dest_hold, used
> > for binding dest to conn or to select dest by scheduler
> > - dests are freed by dest_trash code long after grace period
> >
> > - services:
> > - no global read_lock
> > - lookups under RCU lock allow scheduler to select
> > dests under RCU lock
> > - grace period implemented with IP_VS_WAIT_WHILE is
> > gone allowing scheduler's dest selection and scheduler
> > reconfiguration to run in parallel
> >
> > - schedulers:
> > - schedule method runs under RCU lock, needs _rcu
> > if using svc->destinations, needs _bh suffix to locks
> > because it can be called in LOCAL_OUT hook
> > - when dest is added, the add_dest method is called
> > instead of update_service
> > - when dest is deleted, the del_dest method is called
> > instead of update_service
> > - when dest is updated, the upd_dest method is called
> > instead of update_service
> > - scheduler can hold dests in its state long after they are
> > unlinked from svc, even without providing del_dest handler.
> > But such dests must not be returned by the
> > schedule method (needs IP_VS_DEST_F_AVAILABLE check)
> > - sched_data must be freed after grace period and
> > module exit should be delayed with synchronize_rcu
> > to wait all RCU read-side critical sections to
> > complete
> >
> > - BH:
> > - we do not disable BHs in LOCAL_OUT and sync code anymore
> > - _bh suffixes are added to all places that need them,
> > except timer handlers
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> what is the status of this series?
>
> N.B: THis series is different to "[PATCH 00/15 v3] IPVS optimizations
> (repost)"
Yes, I posted 2 parts with optimizations. Part 1 is
at v3 while part 2 is at its first version. Both series
are ready for applying. BTW, Hans plans more tests in
the next days, may be we will have some numbers for
comparison.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
