[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150916150307.GD3604@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:03:07 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
Cc: 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>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Queue node adaptive spinning
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:32:14AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 09/15/2015 04:38 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:37:32PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>BTW, the queue head vCPU at pv_wait_head_and_lock() doesn't wait early, it
> >>will spin the full threshold as there is no way for it to figure out if the
> >>lock holder is running or not.
> >We can know its cpu id, right? Surely we should then be able to figure
> >out if its active or not, I'm thinking the KVM/Xen know these things
> >somewhere.
>
> We can make a guess of the lock holder cpu id by peeking at previous MCS
> node. However, if the current lock holder got the lock without entering the
> queue or it got the lock by stealing, we won't have information of what CPU
> it is.
Ah, yes I see, we do not have storage for the lock holder. Yes you're
right.
--
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