[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200709103338.GQ597537@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:33:38 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...abs.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] powerpc/64s: implement queued spinlocks and
rwlocks
On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 08:20:25PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com> writes:
> > These have shown significantly improved performance and fairness when
> > spinlock contention is moderate to high on very large systems.
> >
> > [ Numbers hopefully forthcoming after more testing, but initial
> > results look good ]
>
> Would be good to have something here, even if it's preliminary.
>
> > Thanks to the fast path, single threaded performance is not noticably
> > hurt.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 13 ++++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/Kbuild | 2 ++
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h | 5 +++++
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock_types.h | 5 +++++
> > arch/powerpc/lib/Makefile | 3 +++
>
> > include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h | 2 ++
>
> Who's ack do we need for that part?
Mine I suppose would do, as discussed earlier, it probably isn't
required anymore, but I understand the paranoia of not wanting to change
too many things at once :-)
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists