[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1436817022.27924.74.camel@stgolabs.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 12:50:22 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Implement wait-early for
overcommitted guest
On Sat, 2015-07-11 at 16:36 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> /*
> + * Queued Spinlock Spin Thresholds
> + * -------------------------------
> + * Because of the cacheline contention effect of the ticket spinlock, the
> + * same spin threshold for queued spinlock will run a bit faster. So we set
> + * a slight larger threshold for the queue head (1.25X) while the other queue
> + * nodes will keep the same threshold.
How did you come to 1.25x? These sort of magic numbers scare me.
--
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