[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190419130304.GV14281@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:03:04 +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,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count
negative
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 02:02:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 12:26:47PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I thought of a horrible horrible alternative:
>
> Hurm, that's broken as heck. Let me try again.
So I can't make that scheme work, it all ends up wanting to have
cmpxchg().
Do we have a performance comparison somewhere of xadd vs cmpxchg
readers? I tried looking in the old threads, but I can't seem to locate
it.
We need new instructions :/ Or more clever than I can muster just now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists