[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YBHquK0VQCk36T6k@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 23:35:36 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander A Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...ia.com>
Cc: Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] MIPS: Octeon: qspinlock: Exclude mmiowb()
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:36:25PM +0100, Alexander A Sverdlin wrote:
> From: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...ia.com>
>
> On Octeon mmiowb() is SYNCW, which is already contained in
> smp_store_release(). Removing superfluous barrier brings around 10%
> performance on uncontended tight spinlock loops.
It is only implied when CONFIG_SMP, does OCTEON mandate CONFIG_SMP ?
The code could use a comment to explain this for the next poor sod
trying to understand it.
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...ia.com>
> ---
> arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 0a707f3..fbe97b4 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -21,8 +21,10 @@
> */
> static inline void queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock)
> {
> +#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_CAVIUM_OCTEON
> /* This could be optimised with ARCH_HAS_MMIOWB */
> mmiowb();
> +#endif
> smp_store_release(&lock->locked, 0);
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_CAVIUM_OCTEON
> nudge_writes();
> --
> 2.10.2
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists