On 05/07/2018 07:17 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 04:59:11PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> diff --git a/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c b/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
>> index 49f9bf4..d62335f 100644
>> --- a/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
>> +++ b/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
>> @@ -120,7 +120,8 @@ static int proc_ipc_sem_dointvec(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
>> static int zero;
>> static int one = 1;
>> static int int_max = INT_MAX;
>> -static int ipc_mni = IPCMNI;
>> +int ipc_mni __read_mostly = IPCMNI;
>> +int ipc_mni_shift __read_mostly = IPCMNI_SHIFT;
>>
>> static struct ctl_table ipc_kern_table[] = {
>> {
> Is use of ipc_mni and ipc_mni_shift a hot path? As per Christoph Lameter,
> its use should be reserved for data that is actually used frequently in hot
> paths, and typically this was done after performance traces reveal contention
> because a neighboring variable was frequently written to [0]. These would also
> be tightly packed, to reduce the number of cachelines needed to execute a
> critical path, so we should be selective about what variables use it.
>
> Your commit log does not describe why you'd use __read_mostly here. It would
> be useful if it did.
>
> [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.11.1504301343190.28879@xxxxxxxxxx
I used __read_mostly to reduce the performance impact of transitioning
from a constant to a variable. But you are right, their use are probably
not in a hot path. So even the use of regular variables shouldn't show
any noticeable performance difference. I can take that out in the my
next version after I gather enough feedback.
Cheers,
Longman
