On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:19 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, Parav. > > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 02:16:59AM +0530, Parav Pandit wrote: >> Let me think through it. Its been late night for me currently. So dont >> want to conclude in hurry. > > Sure thing. > >> At high level it looks doable by maintaining hash table head on per >> device basis, that further reduces hash contention by one level. >> I will get back on this tomorrow. > > Hmmm... why would it need a hash table? Let's say there's a struct > rdma_device for each rdma_device and then that stuct can simply have > rdma_device->res_table[] or whatever to track limits and consumptions > and rdma_device->res_enabled mask to tell which resources are enabled > on the device. > That table won't be sufficient, because rdma_device is shared among multiple rdma_cgroups each such cgroup has different individual resource limit and usage count. This is currently rpool structure. For res_table[] needs to be per cgroup basis. > Thanks. > > -- > tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
