[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140207082437.GA26811@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:24:37 +0100
From: Torsten Duwe <duwe@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert powerpc simple spinlocks into ticket locks
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 07:08:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:37:27PM +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > I must admit that I haven't tested the patch on non-pseries ppc64 nor on
> > ppc32. Only ppc64 has the ldarx and I tried to atomically replace the
> > holder along with the locks. That might prove unneccessary.
>
> But what is the holder for? Can't we do away with that field?
Scott, Peter: good questions.
The conditional is wrong because I confused pSeries with ppc64 CPUs with
64-bit kernels. I got deluded by the LOCK_TOKEN definition above. Is that
correctly ifdef'd, with PPC64? The holder field should be ifdef'd
CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR, independent of ppc64.
It is an advisory performance hint, and doesn't need to be updated atomically
with the lock; this and the above are 2 reasons to drop the asm string
operand size voodoo as well.
Thanks,
Torsten
--
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