[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57C0D372.9030301@hpe.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:40:34 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
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>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH -v2 4/4] locking/mutex: Add lock handoff to avoid
starvation
On 08/26/2016 11:18 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:30:31AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 08/25/2016 06:23 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> You're right.. I'll try again tomorrow.
>> Actually, it is also OK to handoff from NULL=>new, but nothing else is
>> appropriate.
> I pushed out new patches to git, could you have a peek?
>
> - killed another of that mutex abuse
> - fixed ATOMIC_FETCH_OP for SH4
> - split: rm arch/*/include/asm/mutex*.h include/asm-generic/mutex*.h
> into a separate patch to aid in review
> - fixed lockdep
> - added an uncontended unlock fast path, to mirror the unconteded lock
> fast path
> - reworked the handoff stuff (again)
>
> I didn't try and be too clever, since its far too hot to think.
>
> Still need to look at adding spinning to the handoff case.
> Also need to look at writing (much) better changelogs, they stink.
>
I have looked at the handoff code and I didn't see any problem.
BTW, I also sent out a patch to add optimistic spinning to the waiter.
Please let me know your thought on that.
Thanks,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists