[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1412791184.5173.11.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 19:59:44 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sgunderson@...foot.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: bisected: futex regression >= 3.14 - was - Slowdown due to
threads bouncing between HT cores
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 13:04 -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Mike Galbraith
> <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > 11d4616bd07f38d496bd489ed8fad1dc4d928823 is the first bad commit
> > commit 11d4616bd07f38d496bd489ed8fad1dc4d928823
> > Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Date: Thu Mar 20 22:11:17 2014 -0700
> >
> > futex: revert back to the explicit waiter counting code
>
> While that revert might make things a tiny bit slower (I hated doing
> it, but the clever approach sadly didn't work on powerpc and depended
> on x86 locking semantics), I seriously doubt it's really relevant.
> It's more likely that the *real* problem itself is very
> timing-dependent, and the subtle synchronization changes here then
> expose it or hide it, rather than really fixing anything.
>
> So like Thomas, I would suspect a race condition in the futex use, and
> then the exact futex implementation details are just exposing it
> incidentally.
Whew, good, futex.c is hard. Heads up chess guys <punt>.
-Mike
--
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