[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BBCC174.7020409@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:31:32 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"Peter W. Morreale" <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <sdietrich@...ell.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
John Cooper <john.cooper@...rd-harmonic.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] futex: handle timeout inside adaptive lock spin
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Darren Hart wrote:
>
>> Signed-off-by: Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/futex.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
>> index c33ac2a..af61dcd 100644
>> --- a/kernel/futex.c
>> +++ b/kernel/futex.c
>> @@ -2385,6 +2385,7 @@ out:
>> /**
>> * trylock_futex_adaptive() - Try to acquire the futex lock in a busy loop
>> * @uaddr: the futex user address
>> + * @timeout: absolute timeout or NULL if none
>> *
>> * Try to acquire a futex lock in a loop until the owner changes or the owner
>> * is descheduled. To lock the futex, set the value to the current TID.
>> @@ -2394,10 +2395,11 @@ out:
>> * 1 - Futex lock acquired
>> * <0 - On error
>> */
>> -static int trylock_futex_adaptive(u32 __user *uaddr)
>> +static int trylock_futex_adaptive(u32 __user *uaddr, ktime_t *timeout)
>> {
>> int ret = 0;
>> u32 curval;
>> + ktime_t now;
>>
>> for (;;) {
>> struct thread_info *owner;
>> @@ -2433,6 +2435,22 @@ static int trylock_futex_adaptive(u32 __user *uaddr)
>> if (need_resched())
>> break;
>>
>> + if (timeout) {
>> + now = ktime_get();
>
> Hmm. Calling that in every iteration might hurt especially on non
> TSC systems, but well...
I haven't come across a better alternative since arming the timer before
setting TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE isn't appropriate.
>
>> +/* FIXME: consider creating ktime_less_than(lhs, rhs) */
>
> No need. The .tv64 comparison works in both cases. :)
Ah, for some reason I was thinking that was only the case if
CONFIG_KTIME_SCALAR was set. Very nice, thanks.
--
Darren Hart
IBM Linux Technology Center
Real-Time Linux Team
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists