[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170706162024.GD2393@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 09:20:24 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"dave@...olabs.net" <dave@...olabs.net>,
"manfred@...orfullife.com" <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
"tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"stern@...land.harvard.edu" <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"parri.andrea@...il.com" <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Remove spin_unlock_wait()
On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 06:05:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 02:12:24PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Paul E. McKenney
[ . . . ]
> Now on the one hand I feel like Oleg that it would be a shame to loose
> the optimization, OTOH this thing is really really tricky to use,
> and has lead to a number of bugs already.
I do agree, it is a bit sad to see these optimizations go. So, should
this make mainline, I will be tagging the commits that spin_unlock_wait()
so that they can be easily reverted should someone come up with good
semantics and a compelling use case with compelling performance benefits.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists