[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52EA74D1.3040109@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:50:41 -0500
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, aswin@...com,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 0/4] Introducing a queue read/write lock implementation
On 01/30/2014 10:43 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 01/30/2014 10:17 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 02:04:53PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> So I took out that ugly union and rewrote the code to be mostly
>>> atomic_*(), gcc generates acceptable code and its smaller too.
>>>
>>> 824 0 0 824 338
>>> defconfig-build/kernel/locking/qrwlock.o
>>> 776 0 0 776 308
>>> defconfig-build/kernel/locking/qrwlock.o
>>>
>>> I don't think I wrecked it, but I've not actually tried it yet.
>> I did wreck it.. :-)
>>
>> The below is still small and actually works.
>>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/Kconfig | 1
>> arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2
>> arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock_types.h | 4
>> b/arch/x86/include/asm/qrwlock.h | 18 +++
>> b/include/asm-generic/qrwlock.h | 174
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> b/include/asm-generic/qrwlock_types.h | 17 +++
>> b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c | 157
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> kernel/Kconfig.locks | 7 +
>> kernel/locking/Makefile | 1
>> 9 files changed, 381 insertions(+)
>>
>> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
>>
>
> OK, I see what you are trying to do. I can apply the change to my
> patch & send out v12. So I presume that you are now OK with it. Can I
> add your sign-off line?
>
> -Longman
>
>
One more thing, I often see line like
#define queue_write_unlock queue_write_unlock
So exactly what effect does this macro have?
-Longman
--
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