* Jason Baron <jba...@akamai.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> When we are sharing a wakeup source among multiple epoll 
> fds, we end up with thundering herd wakeups, since there 
> is currently no way to add to the wakeup source 
> exclusively. This series introduces a new EPOLL_ROTATE 
> flag to allow for round robin exclusive wakeups.
> I believe this patch series addresses the two main 
> concerns that were raised in prior postings. Namely, that 
> it affected code (and potentially performance) of the 
> core kernel wakeup functions, even in cases where it was 
> not strictly needed, and that it could lead to wakeup 
> starvation (since we were are no longer waking up all 
> waiters). It does so by adding an extra layer of 
> indirection, whereby waiters are attached to a 'psuedo' 
> epoll fd, which in turn is attached directly to the 
> wakeup source.

>   sched/wait: add __wake_up_rotate()

>  include/linux/wait.h           |  1 +
>  kernel/sched/wait.c            | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++

So the scheduler bits are looking good to me in principle, 
because they just add a new round-robin-rotating wakeup 
variant and don't disturb the others.

Is there consensus on the epoll ABI changes? With Davide 
Libenzi inactive eventpoll appears to be without a 
dedicated maintainer since 2011 or so. Is there anyone who 
knows the code and its usages in detail and does final ABI 
decisions on eventpoll - Andrew, Al or Linus?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to