[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151019095157.GM3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:51:57 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
Aabid Rushdi <Aabid.Rushdi@...opsys.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
"dvhart@...ux.intel.com" <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
"dsahern@...il.com" <dsahern@...il.com>,
"acme@...hat.com" <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf: fix building for ARCv1
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 09:46:35AM +0000, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On ARC we could use the atomic EXchange to implement a user space only binary
> semaphore - these atomic ops will be small duration so it is OK to spin wait for a
> little bit. That's how the old pthread library worked for ARC w/o any atomic support.
That has the obvious problem of lock-holder-preemption and the horrible
performance issues that result from that.
I think the syscall at least has deterministic behaviour, whereas that
userspace spin loop has this abysmal worst case thing.
--
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