Am 28.11.2014 um 13:39 schrieb Peter Lieven: > Am 28.11.2014 um 13:26 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >> On 28/11/2014 12:46, Peter Lieven wrote: >>>> I get: >>>> Run operation 40000000 iterations 9.883958 s, 4046K operations/s, 247ns >>>> per coroutine >>> Ok, understood, it "steals" the whole pool, right? Isn't that bad if we >>> have more >>> than one thread in need of a lot of coroutines? >> Overall the algorithm is expected to adapt. The N threads contribute to >> the global release pool, so the pool will fill up N times faster than if >> you had only one thread. There can be some variance, which is why the >> maximum size of the pool is twice the threshold (and probably could be >> tuned better). >> >> Benchmarks are needed on real I/O too, of course, especially with high >> queue depth. > Yes, cool. The atomic operations are a bit tricky at the first glance ;-) > > Question: > Why is the pool_size increment atomic and the set to zero not? > > Idea: > If the release_pool is full why not put the coroutine in the thread > alloc_pool instead of throwing it away? :-) > > Run operation 40000000 iterations 9.057805 s, 4416K operations/s, 226ns per > coroutine > > diff --git a/qemu-coroutine.c b/qemu-coroutine.c > index 6bee354..edea162 100644 > --- a/qemu-coroutine.c > +++ b/qemu-coroutine.c > @@ -25,8 +25,9 @@ enum { > > /** Free list to speed up creation */ > static QSLIST_HEAD(, Coroutine) release_pool = QSLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(pool); > -static unsigned int pool_size; > +static unsigned int release_pool_size; > static __thread QSLIST_HEAD(, Coroutine) alloc_pool = > QSLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(pool); > +static __thread unsigned int alloc_pool_size; > > /* The GPrivate is only used to invoke coroutine_pool_cleanup. */ > static void coroutine_pool_cleanup(void *value); > @@ -39,12 +40,12 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry) > if (CONFIG_COROUTINE_POOL) { > co = QSLIST_FIRST(&alloc_pool); > if (!co) { > - if (pool_size > POOL_BATCH_SIZE) { > - /* This is not exact; there could be a little skew between > pool_size > + if (release_pool_size > POOL_BATCH_SIZE) { > + /* This is not exact; there could be a little skew between > release_pool_size > * and the actual size of alloc_pool. But it is just a > heuristic, > * it does not need to be perfect. > */ > - pool_size = 0; > + alloc_pool_size = atomic_fetch_and(&release_pool_size, 0); > QSLIST_MOVE_ATOMIC(&alloc_pool, &release_pool); > co = QSLIST_FIRST(&alloc_pool); > > @@ -53,6 +54,8 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry) > */ > g_private_set(&dummy_key, &dummy_key); > } > + } else { > + alloc_pool_size--; > } > if (co) { > QSLIST_REMOVE_HEAD(&alloc_pool, pool_next); > @@ -71,10 +74,15 @@ Coroutine *qemu_coroutine_create(CoroutineEntry *entry) > static void coroutine_delete(Coroutine *co) > { > if (CONFIG_COROUTINE_POOL) { > - if (pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE * 2) { > + if (release_pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE * 2) { > co->caller = NULL; > QSLIST_INSERT_HEAD_ATOMIC(&release_pool, co, pool_next); > - atomic_inc(&pool_size); > + atomic_inc(&release_pool_size); > + return; > + } else if (alloc_pool_size < POOL_BATCH_SIZE) { > + co->caller = NULL; > + QSLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&alloc_pool, co, pool_next); > + alloc_pool_size++; > return; > } > }
Signed-off-by: Peter Lieven <p...@kamp.de>