[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <FE2371CB-76A3-40E1-8994-0DFE00EFFFB3@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 12:59:01 +0800
From: panxinhui <xinhui@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: panxinhui <xinhui@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, dave@...olabs.net,
will.deacon@....com, Waiman.Long@....com, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq lock
> 在 2016年6月26日,03:12,Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> 写道:
>
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:27:51AM +0800, panxinhui wrote:
>
>> by the way I still think mutex_unlock has a big overload too.
>
> Do you mean overhead?
>
oh, maybe you are right.
mutex_unlock ’s implementation uses inc_return variant on ppc, and that’s expensive. I am thinking of using cmpxchg instead.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists