Commit ffd26648 authored by Manfred Spraul's avatar Manfred Spraul Committed by james toy

If multiple simple decrements on the same semaphore are pending, then the

current code scans all decrement operations, even if the semaphore value
is already 0.

The patch optimizes that: if the semaphore value is 0, then there is no
need to scan the q->alter entries.

Note that this is a common case: It happens if 100 decrements by one are
pending and now an increment by one increases the semaphore value from 0
to 1.  Without this patch, all 100 entries are scanned.  With the patch,
only one entry is scanned, then woken up.  Then the new rule triggers and
the scanning is aborted, without looking at the remaining 99 tasks.

With this patch, single sop increment/decrement by 1 are now O(1).
(same as with Nick's patch)
Signed-off-by: default avatarManfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
parent 7cfc032c
......@@ -474,6 +474,17 @@ again:
q = (struct sem_queue *)((char *)walk - offset);
walk = walk->next;
/* If we are scanning the single sop, per-semaphore list of
* one semaphore and that semaphore is 0, then it is not
* necessary to scan the "alter" entries: simple increments
* that affect only one entry succeed immediately and cannot
* be in the per semaphore pending queue, and decrements
* cannot be successful if the value is already 0.
*/
if (semnum != -1 && sma->sem_base[semnum].semval == 0 &&
q->alter)
break;
error = try_atomic_semop(sma, q->sops, q->nsops,
q->undo, q->pid);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment