[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0ea27d18-6d45-9673-38b7-78d59325f9d5@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 22:08:34 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: guoren@...nel.org, palmer@...osinc.com, heiko@...ech.de,
hch@...radead.org, arnd@...db.de, peterz@...radead.org,
will@...nel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com, mingo@...hat.com,
philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu, cmuellner@...ux.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David.Laight@...LAB.COM
Cc: linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-csky@...r.kernel.org,
Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 10/10] csky: Add qspinlock support
On 7/24/22 08:25, guoren@...nel.org wrote:
> From: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> Enable qspinlock by the requirements mentioned in a8ad07e5240c9
> ("asm-generic: qspinlock: Indicate the use of mixed-size atomics").
>
> C-SKY only has "ldex/stex" for all atomic operations. So csky give a
> strong forward guarantee for "ldex/stex." That means when ldex grabbed
> the cache line into $L1, it would block other cores from snooping the
> address with several cycles.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
> ---
> arch/csky/Kconfig | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> arch/csky/include/asm/Kbuild | 2 ++
> arch/csky/include/asm/cmpxchg.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/csky/Kconfig b/arch/csky/Kconfig
> index dfdb436b6078..09f7d1f06bca 100644
> --- a/arch/csky/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/csky/Kconfig
> @@ -354,6 +354,22 @@ config HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_STRING_OPS
> Say Y here to enable EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_STRING_OPS. Some CPU models could
> deal with unaligned access by hardware.
>
> +choice
> + prompt "C-SKY spinlock type"
> + default CSKY_TICKET_SPINLOCKS
> +
> +config CSKY_TICKET_SPINLOCKS
> + bool "Using ticket spinlock"
> +
> +config CSKY_QUEUED_SPINLOCKS
> + bool "Using queued spinlock"
> + depends on SMP
> + select ARCH_USE_QUEUED_SPINLOCKS
> + help
> + Make sure your micro arch LL/SC has a strong forward progress guarantee.
> + Otherwise, stay at ticket-lock/combo-lock.
"combo-lock"? It is a cut-and-paste error. Right?
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists