[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160824165431.GH16944@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 17:54:32 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] locking/mutex: Rework mutex::owner
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 06:52:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 05:34:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:56:59AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > + owner = atomic_long_read(&lock->owner);
> > > > + for (;;) {
> > > > + unsigned long old;
> > > > +
> > > > + old = atomic_long_cmpxchg_release(&lock->owner, owner, owner & 0x03);
> > > > + if (old == owner)
> > > > + break;
> > > > +
> > > > + owner = old;
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > Can you rewrite this using atomic_long_fetch_and_release?
> >
> > Yes, until patch 3/3.. but now that you mention it I think we can do:
> >
> > owner = atomic_long_read(&lock->owner);
> > if (!(owner & MUTEX_FLAG_HANDOFF))
> > (void)atomic_long_fetch_and_release(MUTEX_FLAGS, &lock->owner);
> >
>
> And of course, x86 would very much like atomic_long_and_release() here,
> such that it can do LOCK ADD instead of a LOCK CMPXCHG loop. But of
> course, we don't have that ...
... yeah, I noticed that. There is a curious use of atomic_and in
linux/atomic.h, but it's packed full of false promises.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists