[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190403131228.GI4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 15:12:28 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip v3 11/11] locking/rwsem: Optimize rwsem structure for
uncontended lock acquisition
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 02:09:41PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> For an uncontended rwsem, count and owner are the only fields a task
> needs to touch when acquiring the rwsem. So they are put next to each
> other to increase the chance that they will share the same cacheline.
Did you try and micro-bench this?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists