Skip to content

Pin an Executor's State to minimize atomic operations. #146

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 27, 2025
Merged

Pin an Executor's State to minimize atomic operations. #146

merged 5 commits into from
Aug 27, 2025

Conversation

james7132
Copy link
Contributor

Use Pin<&'a State> to point to the state instead of cloning Arcs, this should reduce the amount of atomic operations required.

This should be sound given that the state are never moved until the Executor is dropped. This still uses Arc instead of Box as miri will treat a former Box as a uniquely owned pointer and cannot be shared (backed by Unique vs Shared).

Benchmark results:

group                                               master                                 pinned-state
-----                                               ------                                 ------------
executor::create                                    1.06  944.7±129.72ns        ? ?/sec    1.00   889.7±17.24ns        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::channels                     1.00     35.5±0.76ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     35.7±0.75ms        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::spawn_batch                  1.23     27.8±5.06µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     22.6±9.96µs        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::spawn_many_local             1.08     23.2±0.57ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     21.5±0.79ms        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::spawn_one                    1.07   995.0±35.82ns        ? ?/sec    1.00   929.5±26.16ns        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::spawn_recursively            1.06    144.8±1.28ms        ? ?/sec    1.00    136.8±1.56ms        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::web_server                   1.00     50.9±1.03ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     51.1±1.80ms        ? ?/sec
multi_thread/executor::yield_now                    1.00     20.2±0.61ms        ? ?/sec    1.01     20.4±0.28ms        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::channels                    1.00     14.4±0.41ms        ? ?/sec    1.07     15.4±0.66ms        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::spawn_batch                 1.08    20.2±11.74µs        ? ?/sec    1.00     18.7±8.31µs        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::spawn_many_local            1.11      5.4±0.72ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.9±0.24ms        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::spawn_one                   1.02  1422.7±75.41ns        ? ?/sec    1.00  1388.6±42.78ns        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::spawn_recursively           1.03     22.6±1.05ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     21.9±1.11ms        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::web_server                  1.03     23.0±0.22ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     22.3±0.31ms        ? ?/sec
single_thread/executor::yield_now                   1.02      4.1±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.0±0.03ms        ? ?/sec

@james7132 james7132 requested a review from notgull August 14, 2025 01:42
@james7132 james7132 mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2025
Open
@notgull
Copy link
Member

notgull commented Aug 16, 2025

I intend to review this, but I am preoccupied at the moment.

notgull
notgull requested changes Aug 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@notgull notgull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall looks good, one minor nitpick.

notgull
notgull approved these changes Aug 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@notgull notgull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! Rebase and I will merge. (Or you can too.)

@james7132 james7132 merged commit c10412c into smol-rs:master Aug 27, 2025
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@notgull notgull notgull approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@james7132 @notgull