From: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
To: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@jauu.net>
Cc: richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH Resend] epoll: add EPOLLEXCLUSIVE support
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:54:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120329185416.GC2424@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120329163222.GA3145@hell>
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 06:32:22PM +0200, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
> * Jason Baron | 2012-03-29 11:53:24 [-0400]:
>
> >I was trying to better understand the use-case, since at least for the
> >test case you posted, 'EPOLLET', already does what you want.
> >
> >Also, the 'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE' flag in your patch addresses multiple threads
> >blocking on *different* epoll fds. However, if multiple threads are
> >blocked on a single epoll fd, they will all be woken even if 'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE'
> >is set. Shouldn't 'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE' affect that case too?
>
> Hey Jason,
>
> I just wanted to address the "main use-case" (as implemented in a bunch of
> network server): one listen socket (say 80) is created and a epoll fd is
> created. The listen socket is added to the set and n threads are created
> afterwards. So now you have the situation that one listening socket is added
> to the set and all threads are awoken if a new client connects. This patch
> reduce the useless-all-thread-awoken-overhead by awake only one thread.
>
> Hagen
Hi,
But the behavior of the testcase you've supplied is not changed by the
'EPOLLEXCLUSIVE' support. So is this not the right testcase?
Thanks,
-Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-29 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-28 13:57 [PATCH Resend] epoll: add EPOLLEXCLUSIVE support Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-03-28 14:09 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2012-03-28 16:21 ` Jason Baron
2012-03-28 19:58 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-03-29 14:16 ` Jason Baron
2012-03-29 15:05 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-03-29 15:53 ` Jason Baron
2012-03-29 16:32 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-03-29 18:54 ` Jason Baron [this message]
2012-03-29 21:19 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
2012-04-05 22:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-03-29 14:51 ` Hagen Paul Pfeifer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120329185416.GC2424@redhat.com \
--to=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hagen@jauu.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi \
--cc=richard.weinberger@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).