[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150716155312.GK26390@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:53:12 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip v2 0/2] locking/qrwlock: Improve qrwlock performance
Hi Waiman,
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 05:32:21PM +0100, Waiman Long wrote:
> v1->v2:
> - Take out patch 1 which had been merged to tip.
> - Take out patch 4 as the change may impact light load performance
> - Rebased to the latest tip branch
>
> In converting some existing spinlocks to rwlock, it was found that
> the write lock slowpath performance isn't as good as the qspinlock.
> This patch series tries to improve qrwlock performance to close the
> gap between qspinlock and qrwlock.
>
> With this patch series in place, we can start converting some spinlocks
> back to rwlocks where it makes sense and the lock size increase isn't
> a concern.
Both of these patches look fine to me:
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cheers,
Will
--
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